SAFETY IN THE PLANT
Why taking an active role in safety is good for business
Plant safety and company profitability are very closely linked, says Dr Andrew Fowler.
Selon le Dr. Andrew Fowler, la sécurité dans les usines et la rentabilité de l’entreprise sont deux domaines intriqués.
Anlagensicherheit und
Unternehmensrentabilität sind sehr eng miteinander verknüpft, sagt Dr. Andrew Fowler.
F
ew would disagree that the primary objective of any business is to make a profit - preferably a substantial one. In
fact, unless a company has been unfortunate enough to suffer the effects of a major accident, it is fairly safe to assume that the main focus in board meetings remains firmly on financial matters, with plant safety often much further down the agenda. The fact is that plant safety and company profitability are actually very closely linked. Major accidents in high hazard industries can be extremely costly, with forced downtime, compensation claims, fines, clean- up costs, rebuilding expenses, damage to reputation, and in the worst case scenarios, loss of human life. Board members and senior management
are ultimately responsible for plant safety. And under the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 the courts now have power to prosecute companies rather than individuals in fatality cases where it is deemed that an organisation’s conduct in respect of health and safety matters has fallen far below what could have been expected in terms of duty of care. In addition, employers in high hazard
industries are increasingly being called upon to demonstrate organisational competence in Process Safety Management (PSM). This means having a working knowledge and clear policy on PSM throughout the organisation, but importantly led from the top. As Phil Scott, Safety & Risk Policy
Manager at the Chemical Industries Association says: “Businesses managing major hazard potential have to appreciate that the hazardous substances they store represent their highest business risks, and need to be sure they have effective systems to manage those risks.” Despite this, results from the first ever
PSM benchmarking exercise for the chemical industry revealed a high reliance on technical staff to know what needs to be done to maintain plant safety and to implement it. The benchmarking exercise, which was
carried out by HFL Risk Services with the support of the CIA, HSE and the National Skills Academy for the Process Industries, highlighted a distinct disconnect between those responsible for setting policy (i.e. senior management) and those responsible for carrying it out. This divide was also identified by the Process Safety Leadership Group (PSLG) following Buncefield, when they made their recommendations concerning Policy, Monitoring and Review. While it’s essential that competent
personnel are charged with process safety, experience has shown that if not properly directed this often leads to reactive compliance, meaning that company resources are not necessarily targeted to best effect. Since it is senior management and board directors who ultimately approve the finance for the implementation of changes and initiatives to underpin safety, it makes sense that they understand how hazards and risks are identified and assessed. They need to be aware that just because some aspect of safety management has been deemed a ‘hot topic’, honing in on one area may not be the most cost-effective way of driving down overall risk. For example, this may be a particular area where a degree of failure can be accepted whereas other areas may be more risk critical and to postpone other programmes in favour of a hot topic could, in some instances, impede improvements to overall plant operation and maintenance and therefore to the business itself. Of course, installations deemed high
“Major accidents in high hazard industries can be extremely costly, with forced downtime, compensation claims, fines, clean-up costs, rebuilding expenses, damage to reputation, and in the worst case scenarios, loss of human life.”
Dr Andrew Fowler,
Operations Director and Principal Consultant, HFL Risk Services
15 ECE
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19