Kommentaar • Commentary Theo C Haupt The state of construction safety and health education at higher education institutions in the Western Cape, South Africa Abstract The Occupational Health and Safely Act (OHSA) 85 of 1993 requires all employers in South Africa to provide and maintain a working environment that is safe and without risk to the health of their employees. Additionally, OHSA requires employ­ers to provide such information, instructions, training and supervision as may be necessary to ensure the health and safely at work of their workers. Several studies have confirmed a well-established link between safely training and the perform­ ance of companies. High performing organizations were found to invest a larger percentage of payroll costs in training compared to the recommended industry norm. Construction related programs at universities and technikons produce graduates who either take up managerial and supervisory positions within con­ struction firms or establish their own construction companies. The pivotal role of management in driving and promoting safely within their organizations is well documented. In order to comply with the requirements of OHSA these graduates need to be able to recognize, avoid and prevent unsafe conditions on the con­ struction sites that they will be involved with. This article gives an insight into the findings and exploratory studies of safety and health education at higher educa­tional institutions in the Western Cape province of South Africa as well as the views of students on construction safely. Preliminary results suggest that construction related programs do not adequately prepare students to be able to ensure the safely and health of workers on construction sites. Courses make scant reference to the provisions of OHSA and responsibility for worker safety. Keywords: Education, training, worker safely, management. Theo C Haupt, PhD, MPhil, FCIOB, MASI, is a research coordinator at the Peninsula Technikon, Faculty of Engineering, PO Box 1906, Belville, South Africa. Email: . 61 Acta Structilia 2002:9(2) DIE STAND VAN KONSTRUKSIE-VEILIGHEID EN GESONDHEIDSOPLEIDING BY HOERONDERWYSINSTELLINGS IN DIE WESKAAP-PROVINSIE Die Wet op Beroepsgesondheid en Veiligheid, 85 van 1993, vereis dot alle werkge­ wers in Suid-Afrika 'n veilige werksomgewing sonder enige gesondheidsrisiko vir hulle werknemers skep. Hiermee saam vereis die Wet dot werknemers voorsien moet word van inligting, instruksies, opleiding en toesig wat nodig is om die gesondheid en veilgheid van die werkers te verseker. Verskeie studies onderskryf 'n goed gevestigde verband tussen veiligheidsopleiding en werksverrigting van maatskappye. Organisasies met hoe verrigting investeer skynbaar 'n groter persentasie aan loongeld aan personeelopleiding vergeleke die aanbevole bedryfsnorm. Konstruksie-verwante programme by universiteite en technikons voorsien gegradueerdes wat 6f bestuurs- en toesighoudende posisies binne die konstruksiebedryf vul of hulle eie konstruksiemaatskappye stig. Die spil waarom die bestuur en bevordering van veiligheid binne die organisasies draai, is goed gedokumenteer. Orn aan die vereistes van die Wet op Beroepsgesondheid en Veiligheid te voldoen, moet die gegradueerdes in stoat wees om onveilige toes­ tande te herken, te verhoed en voorkomende maatreels op die konstruksieter­reine door te stel. In hierdie artikel word die bevindinge van 'n ondersoek no vei­ligheid en gesondheidsopleiding aan hoeronderwysinstansies in die Wes-Koop ondersoek asook die menings van studente met betrekkking tot konstruksievei­ligheid weer te gee. Volgens voorlopige bevindinge wil dit voorkom asof konstruk­sie-verwante programme nie voldoende voorsiening maak om die veiligheid en gesondheid van werkers op konstruksietereine te verseker nie. Kursusse maak tot 'n mindere mate melding van die voorskrifte van die Wet en die verpligtinge wat op bestuur rus ten opsigte van beroepsveiligheid. Sleutelwoorde: Onderrig, opleiding, werkerveiligheid, bestuur. 62 Haupt/Construction safety and health education Introduction T here is a close relationship between education and labour conditions. As managers with higher education are attracted into organizations, they bring with them core values and standards that influence organizational culture. If the importance of construction worker safety and safety manage­ ment is recognized and included in the education programs of these man­ agers an improved safety culture will be created. Consequently construction worker safety performance on construction sites will improve. The South African government has encapsulated the essence of this pivotal relationship in the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) 85 of 1993. In terms of OHSA clause 8( l) all employers in South Africa are required to pro­ vide and maintain a working environment that is safe and without risk to the health of their employees. Additionally, OHSA clause 8(2)(e) requires employers to provide such information, instructions, training and supervision as may be necessary to ensure the health and safety at work of their work­ ers. Several studies have confirmed a well-established link between safety training and the performance of companies. For this reason high perform­ ing companies invest larger percentages of their payroll cost in training than the recommended industry norm. The approach taken by top management in an organization influences the approach taken by subordinates (Marshall 1994; Haupt 2001 ). A study by the National Institute of Occupational Health and Safety in the United States found that successful safety practices were influenced by a strong management commitment to safety expressed through active involvement in program implementation and demonstrated concern for worker well being. Many managers have discovered that if they empha­ sized safety by becoming safety conscious themselves, it was likely that their organizations would have good safety records. Since manage­ ment is responsible for the creation and maintenance of the working environment and activities into which workers must fit and interact in, they can contribute significantly to controlling unsafe activities and con­ ditions which have been cited as the direct causes of accidents (Holt 2001; Hinze 1997). Construction related programs at universities and technikons produce graduates who either take up managerial and supervisory positions with­ in construction firms or establish their own construction companies. The pivotal role of management in driving and promoting safety within their organizations is well documented (Hinze 1997; Levitt & Samelson 1993; Holt 2001: Coble et al 1999; Mufti 1999). To play this important role they have to be well educated and qualified in construction safety and health matters. In order to comply with the requirements of OHSA these graduates need to be able to recognize, avoid and prevent unsafe 63 " Acta Structilia 2002:9(2) conditions on the construction sites that they will be involved with. This article discusses the findings of exploratory studies of safety and health education at higher education institutions in the Western Cape province of South Africa on the one hand, and the views of students on con­ struction safety on the other. Research methodology In order to obtain data regarding the extent to which safety is integrat­ ed into construction programs that produce the various construction professionals, a survey was developed that sought some basic infor­ mation. The questionnaire used for this purpose was designed to gath­ er information from universities and technikons' in the Western Cape province of South Africa that offered programs in construction related fields. Of the five higher education institutions in the region, only three offered construction programs, namely one university and two tech­ nikons. An additional survey was conducted among third year con­ struction management students at one of the technikons to establish the extent of their exposure to safety and health issues in their aca­ demic courses and their level of knowledge of construction safety and health. These findings were compared with relevant literature. Both questionnaires were self-administered. In the case of the higher education institutions the questionnaire was delivered to the academic head of the relevant department2 or faculty3 who, after completing it, faxed it to the researcher. All three institutions offering construction pro­ grams responded (l 00%). The student survey was conducted during one of their class sessions. All 68 students present at the time completed the questionnaires (100%). Results of institution survey Higher education institutions offered programs in a wide range of con­ struction-related disciplines. From Table 1 it is evident that all three insti­ tutions offered programs in the disciplines of architecture, construction management, civil engineering, electrical engineering and quantity sur­ veying. Two institutions offered programs in mechanical engineering, town planning, and urban and regional planning. None of the institu­ tions offered programs in architectural engineering, facilities manage­ ment, structural engineering and value engineering. The US equivalent of a technikon is a technical university. The US equivalent of a department is a school. e g School of Building Construction. The US equivalent of a faculty is a college, e.g. College of Architecture. 64 Haupt/Construction safety and health education Table l : Disciplines in which institutions offer programmes Discipline No of institutions Architecture 3 Building surveying 1 Construction management 3 Civil engineering 3 Electrical engineering 3 Interior design 1 Maintenance management 1 Mechanical engineering 2 Project management 1 Property development 1 Property management 1 Quantity surveying 3 Town planning 2 Urban and regional planning 2 Table 2 indicates the number of institutions that offer courses on safety and health at various levels of study in a number of disciplines. Students at one institution were exposed to safety and health courses during each of the four years of study in architecture, construction manage­ ment, property development and property management. However, stu­ dents studying civil engineering, electrical engineering, interior design, mechanical engineering, town planning, and urban and regional plan­ ning had no exposure to safety and health throughout their entire aca­ demic programs. Where safety courses were offered they covered the provisions of OHSA of 1993 and the National Building Regulations. One institution reported that while the legislation was referred to in classes there were no focused learning programs for safety and health. None of the institutions offered a course that was wholly devoted to con­ struction safety. Rather, reference was made to safety in courses such as construction management, law and technology. One institution indicat­ ed that within the next three years in safety and health in the final years it would introduce courses of study in the disciplines of building survey­ ing, construction management maintenance management project management property development property management, quantity surveying and value engineering. Reasons given by institutions for presently offering safety and health courses as part of their curriculum included the recognition of their importance both in construction per se and as an indicator of sustainability in construction. 65 Acta Structilia 2002:9(2) Tobie 2: Disciplines in which institutions offer courses focusing on safety and health Discipline Year l Year 2 Year 3 Year4 Architecture l l 2 2 Building surveying l l Construction management l l 3 2 Maintenance management l Project management l 1 l Properly development l l l l Properly management l l l l Quantity surveying l 2 2 Only one institution regarded its graduates as being adequately trained or qualified to deal with construction safety and health issues. While no specific course was offered, safety and health issues were integrated into courses such as construction technology and management. The other institutions concurred that students were only given a broad overview in terms of understanding the main principles, knowing where to get information, and applying the principles. Results of student survey In respect of the importance of various parameters to the success of a building construction project, 80,9% of students regarded completion without injury or fatality as being either fairly or very important. When the means of the responses were compared, this parameter ranked fourth out of the five parameters. Completion on time or within contract period, within cost or budget, and meeting desired quality standards, ranked above safety. These findings are shown in Table 3. In terms of their understanding of the provisions of OHSA, 95,2% of the students claimed that contractors were responsible for worker safety on construction sites. From Table 4 it is evident that 57,4% of the students claimed to be aware of the provisions of OHSA of 1993. They absolved architects, designers, suppliers, clients and engineers from any respon­ sibility for construction safety. This finding is not entirely surprising since safety and health issues were not covered by any of the education insti­ tutions in their engineering programs. This finding is shown in Table 5. 66 Haupt/Construction safety and health education Table 3: The importance of project success parameters Parameter 1 2 3 4 5 Total Mean Sid. dev. Time 2 11 55 68 4,7794 0,4839 2,9% 16,2% 80,9% 100,0% Cost 7 4 57 68 4,7353 0,6376 10,3% 5,9% 83,8% 100,0% Quality 1 6 15 45 67 4,5373 0,7849 1,5% 9,0% 22.4% 67,2% 100,0% Safety 2 11 6 49 68 4,5000 0,8725 2.9% 16,2% 8,8% 72,1% 100,0% Utility 1 5 25 35 66 4,4242 0.7030 1,5% 7,6% 37,9% 53,0% 100,0% Table 4: Awareness of provisions of OHSA Frequency Valid percent Yes 39 57,4% No 29 42,6% Total 68 100,0% Table 5: Responsible for safety Frequency Valid percent Contractor 60 95,2% Worker 3 4,8% Total 68 100,0% With regard to who should be responsible for worker safety on construc­ tion sites, most students (85, l %) selected contractors as their most pre­ ferred party. The findings in Table 6 confirm the earlier finding in Table 5. Interestingly, workers were preferred above engineers, designers, clients and suppliers. 67 Acta Structilia 2002:9(2) Table 6: Party preferred for safety management Party 1 2 3 4 5 Total Mean Sid. dev. Contractor 3 1 6 57 67 4.7015 0.8879 4.5% 1.5% 9.0% 85.1% 100.0% Worker 2 4 7 10 33 56 4,2143 1,1396 3.6% 7.1% 12.% 17.9% 58.9% 100.0% Engineer 12 7 12 13 9 53 3.0000 1.4142 22.6% 13,2% 22.6% 24.5% 17,0% 100.0% Designer 18 6 18 6 4 52 2.4615 1,2904 34.6% 11,5% 34,6% 11.5% 7.7% 100.0% Client 28 7 8 7 2 52 2.0000 1.2680 53.8% 13.5% 15.4% 13.5% 3.8% 100.0% Supplier 30 6 11 3 1 51 1.8039 1.0958 58.8% 11.8% 21.6% 21.6% 2,0% 100.0% Students opined that management had the most impact (63%) on con­ struction worker safety followed by foremen (48,2%). This finding is shown in Table 7. Table 7: Party with most impact on construction safety Party Most impact Less impact Least Total Mean Sid, dev. Management 34 3 17 54 1,6852 0.9281 63.0% 5.6% 31.5% 100.0% Foreman 26 14 14 54 1.7778 0.8393 48,2% 25,9% 25.9% 100,0% Supervisor 13 35 6 55 1.9273 0,7163 23.6% 63.6% 10,9% 100,0% From Table 8 it is clear that students believed that construction (56, l %) was the industry most responsible for work-related accidents and fatali­ ties. This finding is in line with the statistics in most countries. 68 Haupt/Construction safety and health education Table 8: Industry responsibility for accidents and fatalities Industry Frequency Valid percent Manufacturing 1 1,8% Agriculture 1 1,8% Construction 32 56,1% Mining 18 31,6% Transportation 5 8,8% Total 57 100,0% The responses in Table 9 indicate that most students (90,9%) thought new workers were most likely to be injured on construction sites. This result concurs with the findings of several other studies. Table 9: Workers most likely to be injured Type of worker Frequency Valid percent Experienced worker 6 9,1% New worker 60 90,9% Total 66 100,0% Table l 0: The time of day when accidents are most likely to occur Time of day Frequency Valid percent Monday morning before tea 31 50,8% Monday before lunch 3 4,9% Monday after lunch 4 6,6% Monday before afternoon tea 2 3,3% Tuesday before lunch l 1,6% Tuesday before afternoon tea l 1,6% Friday morning before tea l 1,6% Friday before lunch l 1,6% Friday after lunch 11 18,0% Friday before afternoon tea 6 9,8% Total 61 100,0% The majority of students (50,8%) opined that Monday morning before tea was the time of day when accidents were most likely to occur (Table 10). 69 Acta Structilia 2002:9(2) Table 11: When workers should be trained Time Frequency Valid percent Before being employed for the first firm by the firm 27 43,5% Before new or unfamiliar work on a project is commenced 7 11,3% Al regular intervals 28 45,2% Total 62 100,0% Table 11 indicates that students were equally divided on the question whether workers should be trained before being employed for the first time by firms (43,5%) or at regular intervals (45,2%), No students believed that training should occur after an accident occurs. Most students (80,3%) believed that safety meetings should be held weekly. No students thought that these sessions should never be held or held quarterly or annually. This finding is shown in Table 12. Table 12: Frequency of safety meetings Time Frequency Valid percent Daily 6 9,1% Weekly 53 80,3% Monthly 7 10,6% Total 66 100,0% Students were asked to rank 21 actions in terms of how these would potentially improve construction worker safety. The data in Table 13 indi­ cate that disincentive schemes and attitude surveys would not improve worker safety. The other 19 actions would all contribute to improvement to some degree, After comparing the means of their responses, the six actions consid­ ered to potentially improve safety the most were worker training, man­ agement training, safety inspections, safety meetings, safety plans, and employment of safety staff. An interesting feature of these results is the perceived importance of management commitment (ranked 10'"). I I I I 70 Haupt/Construction safety and health education Table 13: Factors to improve construction worker safety Will not Will Will Factor improve slightly significantly Mean Std. dev. safety improve improve safety safety Worker training 8 6 53 2,7059 0.7342 11.8% 8.8% 79,4% Management training 13 24 26 2,6875 3,9234 20.3% 37,5% 40,6% Safety inspections 6 10 51 2.6716 0.6369 9,0% 14.9% 76.1% Safety meetings 7 16 43 2.5821 0.7416 10.4% 23.9% 64.2% Safety plans 7 14 45 2,5758 0,6807 10,6% 21.2% 68,2% Employment of safety staff 11 9 46 2.5672 0.8206 16.4% 13.4% 68.7% Personal protective equipment 9 15 43 2,5075 0.7256 13.4% 22.4% 64.2% Walk-through inspections 8 19 39 2,5075 0.7662 11,9% 28.4% 58.2% Use of safety checklists 12 16 39 2.4412 0,8355 17,6% 23,5% 57.4% Management commitment 14 12 41 2.4030 0.8176 20.9% 17.9% 61,2% Emergency plans 10 20 34 2.3750 0.7454 15.6% 30.3% 53.1% Orientation of workers 18 8 42 2,3529 0,8770 26,5% 11.8% 61.8% Retraining of workers 11 23 31 2.3485 0.8132 16.7% 34.8% 47,0% Medical examinations 17 19 30 2,1970 0,8269 25,8% 28.8% 45.5% Larger safety budget 14 30 23 2,1343 0.7364 20,9% 44.8% 34.3% Incentive schemes 13 29 21 2,1270 0,7294 20,6% 46,0% 33,3% Drug screening 19 22 23 2, 1077 0,8861 29,2% 33,8% 35.4% Document and record analysis 13 36 18 2.0746 0,6812 19.4% 53.7% 26.9% Benchmarking 15 34 15 2,0000 0,6901 23.4% 53,1% 23.4% Disincentive schemes 18 36 9 1.8571 0.6440 28,6% 57.1% 14,3% Attitude surveys 23 33 10 l,8030 0,6843 34,8% 50,0% 15.2% 71 Acta Structilia 2002:9(2) Most students (55,2%) indicated that they had not been adequately exposed to construction safety issues during their academic programs at higher education institutions. These findings are shown in Table 14. Table l 4: Adequacy of exposure to construction safety issues in academic programme Response Frequency Valid percent Yes 29 43,3% No 37 55,2% Not sure 1 1,5% Total 67 100,0% Students offered several suggestions in respect of preparing them to contribute to improving construction worker safety. Their suggestions are shown in Table 15. A large number of students (40%) felt that spending time on construction sites and observing safety practices during the execution of construction activities would be the most beneficial action to take. The other favoured action was learning more about health and safety through courses and workshops. Table 15: Suggestions of students Suggestions Frequency Valid percent Learn more about health and safety 19 31,7% Improved communication 1 1,7% More research 3 5,0% Plan for safety 1 1,7% First-aid training 3 5,0% Know legislation 3 5,0% Taught as separate stream or subject 4 6,7% Spend time on site and observe practices 24 40,0% Increased awareness 2 3,3% Total 60 100,0% 72 I I Haupt/Construction safety and health education Discussion Higher education institutions indicated that they did not offer any courses wholly devoted to construction safety issues. Rather, construction safety issues were integrated into a limited number of courses. Even then stu­ dents were only given a brood overview. Viewed against this cursory and scant treatment of construction safety, it is no surprise that completion of projects without the loss of life or a limb has less importance in the minds of management students than have the traditional project parameters of time, cost and quality. Several authors (Hinze 1997; Smallwood & Haupt 2000) have argued that the safety performance of the construction industry will only improve when safety is accorded the same importance as these parameters. A study conducted by Suckarieh and Diamantes (1997) found that universities in the United States devote little course time to the topic of safety in construction projects. While educational institutions make reference to legislation such as OHSA, 1993 in their courses, the impression is created in the minds of students that only contractors are responsible for safety. In fact they pre­ fer contractors to be the parties that should be responsible for safety. The other participants in the construction process are consequently absolved from any responsibility. This finding is contrary to international trends in safety management in terms of which the responsibility for safety has been redistributed to include all the participants in construc­ tion (Coble & Haupt 1999; Smallwood & Haupt 1999, 2000). Whereas several studies have shown that foremen have the greatest direct impact on the safety and health of their workers (Hinze 1997; Levitt and Samelson 1993), students felt that management had the most direct impact. This implies that educational institutions have a responsi­ bility to provide students with the knowledge and training to be able to make that impact - a responsibility not yet recognized or accepted - a finding confirmed by Suckarieh and Diamantes ( 1997) in their study. Students recognized that construction was the industry most responsible for work-related accidents, injuries and fatalities. Hinze (1997), Haupt (200 l) and many others support these findings. Similarly, students opined that new appointees were the worker cohorts most likely to be injured on sites. Hinze (1997) and Levitt and Samelson (1993) support this finding. Monday mornings before tea, usually around l OhOO (in South Africa), was regarded as the day and time when accidents were most likely to occur. This finding concurs with Hinze (1997). Like many authors, students recognized the importance of training and orientation of new hires appointees. Acta Structilia 2002:9(2) While the pivotal role of management commitment is well document­ ed in safety literature, students failed to recognize this role when ranking 21 actions that could improve construction worker safety. Students con­ firmed the admission of the educational institutions concerning their inadequate exposure to construction safety. Time spent on construction sites was cited as the best alternative to this failing of their alma maters. Conclusion This exploratory study confirmed that higher educational institutions are not preparing construction professionals adequately for their future con­ struction safety responsibilities. Consequently students fail to recognize the pivotal role that they play in improving construction safety and health as managers of the construction process. To their credit students have demonstrated a reasonable understanding of several of the key issues despite the scant reference to construction safety in their aca­ demic programs. While educational institutions acknowledge this defi­ ciency, a more concerted effort is necessary to incorporate safety and health issues at all levels of study and across all disciplines. Only then will South African construction professionals be able to influence con­ struction safety and health performance in the industry in a positive way. Programs without formal educational training in construction safe­ ty will place graduating construction professionals at a severe disad­ vantage before and after final graduation. References AL-MUFTI, M.A. 1999. College's emphasis on construction safety. In: Singh, Hinze & Coble (eds). Implementation of safety and health on construction sites. Rotterdam: Balkema, pp. 277-284. COBLE, R., HINZE, J., McDERMOTT, M. & ELLIOTT, B. 1999. College's emphasis on construction safety. In: Singh, Hinze & Coble (eds). Implementation of safety and health on construction sites. Rotterdam: Balkema, pp. 257-264. HAUPT, T.C. & COBLE, R. 1999. Safety and health legislation in Europe and United States: a comparison. In: Gomried Trani & Alves Dias (eds). Safety coordination and quality in construction. Milan: Polytechnic of Milan, pp. 159-164. Haupt/Construction safety and health education HAUPT, T.C. & SMALLWOOD, J.J. 1999. Implications for South Africa of safety and health initiatives in Europe and the United Kinfdom. In: Gomried, Trani & Alves Dias [eds). Safety coordination and quality in construction. Milan: Polytechnic of Milan, pp. 165-1 7 4. HINZE, J. HOLT, A. 1997. Construction safety. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice­ Hall. 2001. Principles of construction safety. Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd. LEVITT, R. & SAMELSON, N. 1993. Construction safety management. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. MARSHALL, G. 1994. Safety engineering. American Society of Safety Engineers. SMALLWOOD, J.J. & HAUPT, T.C. 2000. Safety and health teambuilding. In: Coble, Hinze & Haupt (eds). Construction safety and health management. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, pp. 115-144. SUCKARIEH, G. & DIAMANTES, J. 1997. Educating construction management students in safety. In: Alves Dias & Coble [eds). Implementation of safety and health on construction sites. Rotterdam: Balkema, pp. 567-576. 75