The hut belongs to construction manager Schal and marks the entrance to phase 1 of the redevelopment works for petrochemical giant BP's site in Sunbury, Middlesex. Safety is top of BP's agenda at Sunbury. "We have a policy of no accidents and no harm to people," says Jeremy Bamber, BP's project manager for the site. Bamber is aware of construction's sorry safety record, which is why, for this scheme, he has insisted that the contractors work to the much more rigorous safety standards adopted by the petrochemical industry.
Two years into the redevelopment, the strategy appears to be working. More than a million worker-hours have gone by without a major accident and the project has the best safety record within Schal and its parent company Carillion.
Under Schal's construction management, the Sunbury site is undergoing a complete redevelopment. Its amorphous collection of 89 drab 1960s and 1970s laboratory buildings was the centre of BP's petrochemical research. Now, with most of this work carried out by specialist facilities at universities and on processing sites, Sunbury is being transformed into a modern high-grade office park.
The masterplan for the redevelopment shows 10 new buildings arranged to the north and south of the remodelled public road that bisects the site. When complete, with the exception of a large multistorey car park, nothing will remain of the laboratories complex.
With two of the new office buildings successfully handed over, the construction team is concentrating its efforts on Building B, ready for its March 2001 handover. The structural frame is complete, external cladding is in place and the main runs of services pipework are installed above the ceiling grid. On the top floor, flooring contractor Durabella is now finishing the installation of the raised floor.
For a construction site, Building B is remarkably tidy. There are no mountains of waste littering the floor, no random piles of material gathered ready for installation at some future date. In fact, except for the clearly marked circulation routes, the floors are unusually clear.
It is no accident that housekeeping is impeccable on this project. BP polices the site with Schal on a weekly basis on the lookout for anything that could be deemed a safety hazard. "If anything isn't in order, we're expected to put it right by the next day," says Graham Barter, Schal's construction manager. And if they don't? "We don't know," says John Bray, project director at Schal, "we haven't dared find out."
Bray is keen to point out that Schal also carries out its own regular site inspections. Any debris or surplus material left on site is cleared away by Schal, which then bills the offending contractor. For Schal, good housekeeping is paying dividends in other areas. For example, keeping floors clear of rubbish improves access for other trades.
We have a policy of no accidents and no harm to people
Jeremy Bamber, BP Project Manager
BP's Bamber believes that good housekeeping is a key component in achieving high safety standards. He uses an accident diagram in the shape of a triangle to explain why. At the apex of the triangle is a site death, while at its base are minor accidents such as trips and slips. "If you can make the base smaller by removing the minor hazards, the whole triangle becomes smaller," he says.
To reduce the likelihood of minor accidents and encourage operatives to take responsibility for site safety, Schal has borrowed an accident awareness technique from Mobil Oil, called Take 5. Each operative is given a pocket-sized Take 5 card to carry around with them on site. The card has five headings on it, which have been adapted to fit the construction process. The headings are: Stop (step back and observe); Think (through task); Identify (hazards); Control (and communicate); and Complete (task safely).
Another safety technique taken straight from the oil industry is near-miss reporting. This requires operatives to report any potential hazards they spot, such as discarded materials or spilled liquid. "Stop" report cards are provided at distribution points located around the site. These can be filled in anonymously and then handed in to a supervisor or the site office.
Schal's aim is to respond to cards within an hour.
For operatives more used to adversarial relationships on site, keeping an eye out for hazards that could affect other workers requires a radical change in attitude. "There is a reluctance on the part of the workforce to grass on other members," admits Bray. In fact, a number of incentives have had to be introduced to encourage operatives and contractors to make safety a priority. For instance, BP has launched a weekly draw with a £120 prize to encourage them to wear personal protection equipment and comply with safe working practices: those who infringe safety rules are removed from the draw. When the number of operatives on site reached a peak, BP increased the prize to an £800 holiday voucher, and employed an additional safety officer to walk the site.
If the chance to make some extra money is the carrot for operatives to take safety seriously, the stick is a "three strikes and you're out" rule. This has the backing of the directors of all the trade contractors on site to encourage compliance or if necessary remove repeat offenders, says Bray. So far, only one person has been given "out".
Another stick being waved by BP is that each of the specialist contractors had to allow for a day's safety training for their operatives in their tenders. "Ultimately, BP ends up paying for the training through higher tender prices," says Bamber. "But it's a good incentive for contractors to try to reduce labour turnover and retain trained staff – otherwise they end up paying more for training."
Some contractors now seem to be taking safety seriously. Bray has heard reports that the director of one company is offering his team a crate of beer if they win a safety award. A change of attitude by management? Maybe, but BP has also let it be known that the large contracts for the next phase of work on site will go only to contractors with a good safety record. "If a company puts in a slightly higher bid but has a significantly better safety record, we would definitely consider them," says Bamber.
If a company puts in a slightly higher bid but has a significantly better safety record, we would definitely consider them
Jeremy bamber, BP Project Manager
It is dismal that, in an industry with such an appalling safety record, contractors and their operatives have to be bribed with cash to get them to take safety seriously. In the petrochemical industry, an ethos of safe working and responsibility to others is instilled in workers from day one. BP's Bamber believes this is because there is greater potential for things to go wrong in his industry, "and when they do, a lot more people can get damaged".
Money is another explanation Bamber offers. "Initially, petrochemical companies were making a lot more profit, so they could afford to put more money into safety," he says. "The fragmented nature of the construction industry makes it a real challenge," says Schal's Bray.
As a client, BP is unusual in applying safety management to all its projects, construction or otherwise. "We selected Schal for this project on the basis of its safety record," says Bamber.
Accepting the contract to work on BP's site means Schal has to attend BP's safety meetings and get involved in the exchange of ideas and practices. Project director Bray also has to attend the Sunbury site's health and safety team meetings, as does Schal's safety manager.
At the start of the project, a target was set for "days away from work cases" (DAFWC). The standard adopted was 0.2 DAFWC per 100 000 hours – less than 20% of the building industry average of 1.02. To make it even more of a challenge, BP insisted that Schal adopt the petrochemical standard of reporting, in which one day off work following an accident is considered a reportable incident, rather than the three days more usually used in construction.
So far, in one million hours worked, two operatives have had to take a day off work. The 0.2 target has been hit – and neither accident would even have been reported under the construction industry's usual definition. In fact, on an average UK construction site, there would have been 14 DAFWC over the same number of hours worked. This figure is still on the increase.
Ultimately, it is the combination of initiatives that has contributed to the project's excellent safety record. Schal has played its part but it is the client, BP, that must take credit for making safety paramount on its construction projects, and more so for putting up the money to make it happen.
Bamber admits that, at the start, he had to "hound some of the trades". Certainly Schal's Barter was taken aback by just how rigorous BP was about safety. "They came down hard on us at the start of the project," he says.
Five ways safety was improved at Sunbury
Credits
Client BP Construction Manager Schal Architect Broadway Malyan Structural Engineer Ove Arup & Partners Services Engineer Hoare Lea & Partners Quantity Surveyor Davis Langdin & Everest
