Solution
Soumi answered on
Oct 03 2020
Running Head: SAFETY PRACTICES AT WORKPLACE 1
SAFETY PRACTICES AT WORKPLACE 2
HAZARDS AND SAFETY PRACTICES AT WORKPLACE: CASE STUDY OF KENOSS CONTRACTORS
Table of Contents
Introduction 3
Describing the Workplace: Kenoss Contractors 3
The Hazards at Kenoss Contractors 3
Possible Ways to Avoid the Safety Breach 5
The Actual Incident 5
Contribution of SAFEWORK in Resolving the Issue 6
Possible Strategies Different from those of SAFEWORK 7
Addressing the Issue in Own Workplace Context 8
Conclusion 8
References 10
Introduction
Organisations generate its functioning power from its workforce, and therefore, considering the safety of the employees is among the essential tasks, the management of an organisation must ensure. The use of tools, the dealing with electricity, fire, water and chemicals along with the nature of the task as well as the circumstances at workplace generate danger that requires safety precautions to safeguard the employees from injury and fatality. There are certain parameters that can help in determining the potential degree of hazards and danger, thereby, making the theoretical-practical knowledge a necessary part of safety managers’ learning for avoiding accidents. In the cu
ent essay, the accident at Kenoss Contractors has been chosen as the case study for assessing the reasons for the accidents and offer solution for avoiding such issues.
Describing the Workplace: Kenoss Contractors
Kenoss Contractors is a small firm, which has been associated with preparing project plans for private and government projects and involves in the refinement of quality planning, project scheduling, cost control and forecasting. The company has only a few employees, keeping the team intact. However, the selection of candidates for higher positioned ranks is conducted entirely on the personal preferences system, which makes the son of manager eligible for the post of manager without having proper management skills or qualification. The safety standards are not properly maintained by the company and the positions of safety manager are only retained for legal bindings (LinkedIn, 2018).
The Hazards at Kenoss Contractors
In the light of the accident, in which Michael Booth died, shows that there have been areas of concern in safety practices that generates many potential hazards. Firstly, the company appoints its high-level management employees on the personal basis, where the son of the general manager becomes the next general manager and candidates are positioned on posts based on their fathers’ role in the company without the judgement of their capabilities and learning. As mentioned by Triplett and Loh (2018), appointing employees, especially on the higher management roles makes the quality of management biased, ineffective and prone to risk.
Secondly, Kenoss Contractors has a lack of knowledge about the safety measures it should provide its employees during their tasks on sites. As argued by Firfiray, Cruz, Neacsu and Gomez-Mejia (2018), positioning of next-generation managers from personal preferences can yield positive outcomes only if they have or acquire ample knowledge of the positional tasks they have to perform. In case of Kenoss Contractors, the son of the previous manager who has been positioned for the post of safety manager lacked the knowledge of safety management and has not pursued to learn about safety at the workplace, leading to the opening of potential areas of danger. A closer assessment of the company management and their ability to perform their roles makes it evident that the company has only placed its managers in their respective roles in order to fill the void of organisational structure rather than maintaining proper functionality.
Lastly, the company lacks ample degree of ethical consideration, which can be seen after the accident, as the safety manager attempted to blame the reason of death on the employee himself, trying to sneak out of the legal complications. The managers also tried to tamper with the evidences by deleting the attendance report of the employee who died. The recruitment process at the organisation is also unethical, as personal preferences are administered for recruiting employees for a higher post. In addition, the company has a very bad policy for caring for its employees, which can be witnessed from the unapologetic behaviour of the management after the death. As mentioned by Ogundipe...