Industrial Accident Prevention Discussed

Press, Volume CX, Issue 32386, 27 August 1970, Page 17

Industrial Accident Prevention Discussed

On the law of averages, preventive measures whieh stop one work accident causing serious injury also stop 29 other accidents causing minor injury, and prevent a total of 330 production breakdowns, a Christchurch conference on industrial accident prevention was told on Tuesday.

The speaker, Mr A. Lateiner, a New York management consultant retained by the National Safety Association of New Zealand, said that the industrial accident rate in New Zealand was 33 injuries for every million manhours, compared with the United States average of 14. Apart from a national inclination to take risks, Mr Lateiner saw two reasons, in

particular, for this. One was that employers were directing 80 per cent of their preventive efforts to correcting dangerous conditions, whereas 80 per cent of industrial accidents were due to dangerous acts arid practices.

Another factor was that Zealand’s accident statistics were inadequate and out-of-date. “It’s no good going to employers with 1966 figures,” said Mr Lateiner. “They say that was four years ago, and there’s been a big improvement since then, and they just don’t pay attention. Last year’s figures they have to regard differently.” New Zealand's statistics for 1967 and 1968 are expected to place the Governments work on a par with that of the United States Department of Labour.

But both Government’s publications compare poorly with “Accident Facts,” a 96-page booklet published by the American, non-government National Safety Council. Four statisticians and two artiste are employed to provide highly-comprebensive statistics, presented clearly and effectively in tables, graphs and diagrams. The 1969 edition, published early this year, covers accidents to the end of 1968.

For humane reasons, everyone should be concerned with reducing accidents causing injury, Mr Lateiner told the conference; but there were also compelling economic reasons for prevention pollcies.

A major insurance study had shown that for every $1 in visible costs, the average industrial injury cost another $4 in hidden costs.' Visible costs included hospital and compensation costs, but there were nine kinds, of hidden loss, mainly through differing effects on production. Further to this, said Mr Lateiner, for every accident causing injury, no matter how slight, there were 10 accidents that resulted also in loss of production and damage to machinery and materials.

Some American companies were so conscious of accident costs that they employed prevention consultants even after they had reduced their injury rate to one per million man hours, Mr Lateiner said. An average New Zealand company, with the average 33 per million accident rate, could easily halve its casualty and other losses in 12 months by eliminating half of the unsafe acts and conditions in its plant, he added.