Compared to 10 years ago, safety issues are now, without question, more at the forefront of the decision process during the planning, building and operation of underground construction projects. The rise in the profile of safety was well illustrated at this year’s International Tunnelling Association annual world congress where safety/risk management formed, for the first time, its own Keynote Lecture. John Anderson, in his summary of the papers (p34) illustrates the long overdue increase in attention to worker safety during construction, a subject slightly lost in the recent whirlwind of focus on operational safety.
Developing a ‘safety culture’ that runs from the highest to the lowest levels of an institution appears as a common thread in modern trends of thought, illustrated during the conference. A great example of this occurred during construction of London Underground’s Jubilee Line Extension during the late ’90s. On Contract 102, built by the Balfour Beatty/Amec JV, an accident frequency rate of 0.6 per 100,000 working hours had been set as a target.
Despite the efforts of a safety conscious team with an excellent safety management plan, by late 1997 the frequency rate was seemingly unmovable at 1, relating to a three-day accident every week. Not content with this, the JV brought in high-level advisers from the UK Health & Safety Executive, who had access to all safety arrangements and personnel from the JV. The key finding was that, although very safety conscious at a high level, a dilution of this idiom was occurring down the chain of command into the workplace. It appeared that many members of the workforce were unwilling to undertake safety related tasks on their own initiative, fearing a backlash from site foreman stuck in an attitude whereby workers do what they are told – and nothing more!
To combat this, a decision was taken to appoint ‘safety task teams’ including trades charge hands, led by a senior section engineer and supported by safety professionals. Importantly, these teams did not have to have their decisions on safety sanctioned from above and the section project manager could implement said decisions immediately.
Within weeks, the plan proved an exceptional success and began a construction period of 1.6M man-hours worked without incident. This resulted in an accident frequency rate of 0.06, 10 times the original target, a remarkable achievement in anybody’s book.
The fact is, the tunnelling workforce is perfectly capable of seeing what is and what isn’t safe in its own environment. Giving workers the power to actively change unsafe conditions within an organised framework has proved possible.
With the spotlight on safety throughout the whole construction industry, what a string to the tunneller’s bow if one of civil engineering’s most dangerous disciplines can also claim to be one of the safest.
Tris Thomas
