Construction Management - Word - c17.rtf

(37 KB) Pobierz

P1: OSO

JWDD004-17 JWDD004-Halpin-v6 August 4, 2005 12:4

Chapter 17

Safety

Safety in Trenches

The Need

Even though heavy construction equipment such as a crane or backhoe

excavators is used to perform the task of pipe laying in the trench, workers are

required to be inside the trench to guide the excavation, pipe laying, and final

alignment. Work place safety has become a major concern in the construction

industry over the past few decades, and trench cave-ins have caused serious

and often fatal injuries to workers in the United States. It has become of

crucial importance to implement the use of new technologies to prevent

accidents in trench excavation and pipe installation.

Diverse approaches such as shoring, shielding, and sloping have been

Pipe manipulator mounted on

the excavator.

applied to protect workers from cave-ins in trenching and pipe laying

operations. However, even when support systems are used, the danger of

cave-ins still exist due to the nature of the soil and unexpected circumstances.

The Construction Automation and Robotics Laboratory (CARL) at North

Overview of pipe manipulator.

Carolina State University has developed an alternative which involves

advanced new technology: the prototype robotic excavation and pipe

installation system called Pipeman.

Layout of the robotic trenching and pipe installation system

(Huang & Bernold, 1993).

The Technology

The basic Pipeman concept consists of a 3-D spatial positioning system (SPS), which is

interfaced with an excavator to provide the location of the excavator and a beam laser. A

pipe manipulator prototype is attached to the bucket of the excavator, which is capable of

handling pipes of various sizes. A beam laser is also used to help the operator align pipes.

290

P1: OSO

JWDD004-17 JWDD004-Halpin-v6 August 4, 2005 12:4

17.1 Need for Safe Practice 291

Integration of SPS with a CAD system will update the excavator position in real-time and

provide an as-built drawing of pipe laying.

The main components of the concept are the man-machine interface, actuation system,

laser beam and feedback system. The man-machine interface is used to keep the operator

in a safe area and allow him to guide the Pipeman intelligently, while Pipeman works in a

hazardous environment.

17.1 NEED FOR SAFE PRACTICE

A disabling injury or fatal accident on the job site has negative impact on operations at

many levels. Accidents cost money and affect worker morale. Because of the type of work

involved in construction, many dangers exist both for the workers and for the public. For

this reason, the subject of safety offers one area of noncontroversial mutual interest between

management and the work force. The necessity of safe operations and of protecting and

conserving lives by preventing accidents is understood by all.

Although the fatality rate in construction has been reduced within recent years, the

improvement in safety record achieved by the construction industry still lags seriously

behind that achieved in other hazardous industries. The annual number of fatalities in the

construction industry in 2003 exceeded the number of combat deaths during the first 18

months of armed conflict in Iraq (period 2003Ð2004). Construction is a dangerous business.

It is the contractorÕs responsibility to see that everything possible is done to provide

a safe working environment for the work force and the public in general. The factors that

motivate safe practices at the job site are generally identified as follows:

1. Humanitarian concerns

2. Economic costs and benefits

3. Legal and regulatory considerations

Society has taken the position that because of the high health and accident potential intrinsic

to the construction industry, the contractor must accept the liabilities associated with this

hazardous environment and make an appropriate commitment to safe practice and accident

prevention.

17.2 HUMANITARIAN CONCERNS

It is normally accepted that day-to-day living has intrinsic risks that may result in members

of the society being subjected to mental and physical hardship. One of the functions of

society is to minimize pain and suffering. Particularly at the level of the work site, society

has defined the principle that the employer is responsible for providing a safe environment

for the work force. This is based on humanitarian concern. If, for instance, a worker loses

a leg because of a job-related accident and is confined to a wheelchair, the worker is, in

a sense, a casualty of the workplace. Through his desire to be a participating member of

society and support members of his family, the worker is injured. Society has traditionally

shouldered the responsibility for this limitation on a workerÕs abilities. Over the past 120

years, the principle of employer liability for death and injury resulting from accidents or

health hazards occurring at the workplace has been firmly established in common law. The

courts have further charged the employer with the following five responsibilities1:

1. To provide a reasonably safe workplace

1 Lee E. Knack, in Handbook of Construction Management and Organization, Bonny and Frein (eds.), Van

Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1973, Chapter 25.

P1: OSO

JWDD004-17 JWDD004-Halpin-v6 August 4, 2005 12:4

292 Chapter 17 Safety

2. To provide reasonably safe appliances, tools, and equipment

3. To use reasonable care in selecting employees

4. To enforce reasonable safety rules

5. To provide reasonable instructions regarding the dangers of employment

Mandatory requirements for the employer to make formal provision for injuries and deaths

on the job resulted in the enactment of workmenÕs compensation laws in all fifty states

during the first half of the twentieth century.

In 1884, Germany enacted the first workmenÕs compensation act, followed by Austria

in 1887 and England in 1897. The U.S. federal government passed the first American compensation

act in 1908 covering government employees. Following several legal battles, the

Supreme Court, in 1917, declared that states could enact and enforce compulsory WorkmenÕs

Compensation Laws under their power to provide for the public health, safety, and

welfare.

17.3 ECONOMIC COSTS AND BENEFITS

Safety costs can be broken into three categories as follows:

1. Direct cost of previous accidents

a. Insurance premiums and ratings

b. Mandatory accident prevention methods

c. Records, safety personnel

2. Direct cost of each accident occurrence

a. Delay to project

b. Uninsured damages

3. Indirect cost

a. Investigation

b. Loss of skilled workers

c. Loss of equipment

d. Lost production

Direct costs from previous accidents come primarily in the form of insurance premiums,

which have a significant effect on a contractorÕs operating expense. WorkmenÕs

compensation and liability insurance premiums can be calculated using either manual or

merit rating systems. Manual rating is based on the past losses of the industry as a whole.

The premium rate for compensation is normally set by the individual state Compensation

Rating Bureaus. Many states are guided by or actually have their rates set by the National

Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI). The premium rates are based on factors such

as classification of operations, rates of pay, the frequency and severity of accidents in a

particular classification, increases in the cost of cases, and the attitudes of various industrial

compensation commissions. The rates as set and approved by each state insurance

commissioner are known as the manual (standard) rates. These manual rates are published

periodically in the Engineering News Record (ENR) Quarterly Cost Roundup issues. A

listing of some of the rates as reported in the R. S. Means Building Construction Cost Data

is given in Figure 17.1.

The merit rating system bases premiums on a particular companyÕs safety record.

High-risk (high-accident-rated) companies are therefore penalized with higher premiums

than those paid by companies with lowaccident rates. In thisway, a good safety program can

result in substantial financial savings to a company. Higher returns on jobs can be realized,

and the ability to bid lower and win more jobs is greatly enhanced.

P1: OSO

JWDD004-17 JWDD004-Halpin-v6 August 4, 2005 12:4

Figure 17.1 Compensation insurance base rates for construction workers (selected states and crafts).

293

P1: OSO

JWDD004-17 JWDD004-Halpin-v6 August 4, 2005 12:4

294 Chapter 17 Safety

Once the premiums reach a value of $1000, the contractor is eligible for a merit system

rating. That is, the cost of the premium will be individually calculated with the safety record

of the company being the critical consideration. Under the merit system, there are two basic

methods utilized to incorporate the safety record into the final cost of the premium. These

are referred to as the experience rating and retrospective rating methods.

Most insurance carriers use the experience rating method, which is based on the companyÕs

record for the past 3 years not including the most recent preceding year. In this

system, an experience modification rate is multiplied by the manual rate to establish the

premium for a given firm. Data on losses, the actual project being insured, and other variables

are considered in deriving the experience modification rate (EMR). If the company

has an experience modification rate of 75%, it will pay only 75% of the manual premium.

Good experience ratings (EMRs) can lead to significant savings. Clough and Sears (Wiley,

1994) illustrate this with the following example:

Assume that a building contractor does an annual volume of $10 million worth of work.

Considering a typical amount of subcontracting and the cost of materials, this general

contractorÕs annual payroll will be of the order of magnitude of $2.5 million. If his present

workmenÕs compensation rate averages about 8%, his annual premium cost will be about

$200,000. Now assume that an effective accident prevention program results in an experience

modification rate (EMR) of 0.7. This will result in a reduction of the annual premium cost to

about $140,000 for this contractor. Annual savings on the order of $60,000 are thereby

realized on the cost of this one insurance coverage alone.

Retrospective rating is somewhat like self-insurance. It is basically the same as experience

rating except for one point. It utilizes the loss record of the contractor for the previous

year or other defined retrospective period to compute the premium. This can raise or lower

the premium cost based on performance during the retrospective period. The starting point

or basis for this method is again the manual premium. A percentage (usually 20%) of the

standard premium resulting from applying the experience modification factor to the manual

rate is used to obtain the basic premium. The retrospective rate is then calculated as

Retrospective rate = (Tax multiplier) ¡Ñ {Basic premium + [(Incurred loss)

¡Ñ (Loss conversion factor)]}

The incurred loss is the amount paid out to settle claims over the retrospective period. The

loss conversion factor is a percentage loading used to weight the incurred losses to cover

general claims investigation and adjustment expenses. The tax multiplier covers premium

taxes that must be paid to the state. If the data for a given company are as follows:

Manual premium $25,000

Experience modification rate 0.75

(25% credit)

then

Standard premium = 0.75($25,000) = $18,750

Basic premium @ 20% of standard = 0.20($18,750) = $3750

Loss conversion factor = 1.135 (derived from experience)

Tax multiplier = 1.03 (based on state tax)

Incurred losses = $10,000

Then

Retrospective premium = 1.03[3750 + (1.135 ¡Ñ $10,000)]

= $15,553

P1: OSO

JWDD004-17 JWDD004-Halpin-v6 August 4, 2005 12:4

17.4 Uninsured Accident Costs 295

This is a nice savings over the standard premium of $18,750 and provides the contractor

with a clear incentive to minimize the incurred losses. By so doing, the contractor can expect

a large premium rebate at the end of the year.

17.4 UNINSURED ACCIDENT COSTS

In addition to the cost of insurance premiums, additional direct costs for things such as the

salary of the safety engineer and his staff as well as costs associated with the implementation

of a good safety program can be identified. The precise amount of the costs associated with

other safety cost categories is more difficult to assess, and these costs can be thought of

as additional uninsured costs resulting from accidents. Typical uninsured costs associated

with an accident are shown in Table 17.1.

Although varying slightly from source to source, hidden losses of this variety have been

estimated to be as much as nine times the amount spent on comprehensive insurance. In

addition to the costs noted in Table 17.1, another cost is that of paying an injured employee

to show up for work even if he cannot perform at his best. This is common practice for

minor injuries. This is done to avoid recording a lost time accident, which might impact

the insurance premium. While it is very common to return injured workers to work, it is

Table 17.1 Uninsured Costs

Injuries Associated Costs

1. First-aid expenses

2. Transportation costs

3. Cost of investigations

4. Cost of processing reports

1. Difference between actual losses and amount recovered

2. Rental of equipment to replace damaged equipment

3. Surplus workers for replacement of injured workmen

4. Wages or other benefits paid to disabled workers

5. Overhead costs while production is stopped

6. Loss of bonus or payment of forfeiture of delays

Wage Losses Off the Job Accidents

1. Idle time of workers

whose work is interrupted

2. Man-hours spent in

cleaning up accident area

3. Time spent repairing

damaged equipment

4. Time lost by workers

receiving first aid

1. Cost of medical services

2. Time spent on injured workersÕ welfare

3. Loss of skill and experience

4. Training replacement worker

5. Decreased production of replacement

6. Benefits paid to injured worker or dependents

Production Losses Intangibles

1. Product spoiled by

accident

2. Loss of skill and

experience

3. Lowered production of

worker replacement

4. Idle machine time

1. Lowered employee morale

2. Increased labor conflict

3. Unfavorable public relations

Source: From Lee E. Knack, in Handbook of Construction Management and Organization, Bonny and Frein

(eds.), Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1973, Chapter 25.

P1: OSO

JWDD004-17 JWDD004-Halpin-v6 August 4, 2005 12:4

296 Chapter 17 Safety

important that they not be returned to work too soon to avoid their being reinjured or injured

more seriously.

The following situation illustrates the additional losses resulting from hidden costs. At

a large industrial construction site, the survey party chief was on the way to the office to

get a set of plans. The survey crew was to lay out four machine foundations that morning.

The wooden walkway beneath the party chief collapsed. Due to the confusion resulting

from the accident, work activity on the entire site was impacted. The party chief was in

the hospital for 5 weeks with a shattered pelvis. Another party chief who was unfamiliar

with the site was assigned to the surveying crew. As a result, the four machine foundations

were constructed 2 ft farther west than called for in the plans. After this was discovered,

six laborers worked for 20 hours removing the reinforced concrete. The survey crew of

four spent another 5 hours laying out the foundations. Four carpenters worked 20 more

hours preparing new forms. Five more hours were required for the ironworkers to place the

steel reinforcement. The total indirect cost was approximately $5000. Although this activity

was not on the critical path, if it had been, liquidated damages might have been charged

to the contractor. Still, the accident resulted in costs amounting to one weekÕs pay for the

employees affected and the cost of material that had to be replaced.

17.5 FEDERAL LEGISLATION AND REGULATION

The federal government implemented a formal program of mandatory safety practices in

1969 with the passage of the Construction Safety Act as an amendment to the Contract

Work Hours Standard Act. This legislation requires contractorsworking on federally funded

projects to meet certain requirements to protect the worker against health and accident hazards.

In addition, certain reporting and training provisions were established. This program

of required procedures has been referred to as a physical approach to achieving safety. That

is, regulations are prescribed that are designed to minimize the possibility of an unsafe

condition arising. A typical physical measure of this type is the requirement to install guard

rails around all open floors of a multistory building during construction. Guard rails are

needed anytime there is change in elevation of 6 feet and the worker is not protected by a

personnel fall arrest system, warning line, or warning attendant (used to watch workers and

warn them if theyÕre too close to falling).

Furthermore, physical measures are implemented to minimize injury in the event of

an accident. An example of this is the requirement to wear a safety belt when working

with high steel, and the installati...

Zgłoś jeśli naruszono regulamin