"On Topic" "Blame The Worker" Behavior Based Safety or Not?

[Integrity]

Unless it's a permanent injury

Worker's Comp often limits correct compensation even when injury is permanent.

 

[Integrity]

You don't understand tort. If what you said was correct, and the logic applied everywhere, UPS would pay out on all damage claims. It would be hard to prove if the package was damaged by UPS systems to the point that items would fall out, but it would be easy to determine if the shipper used a box that was not rated for the weight.

You said the part was 50lbs, and that the box was on top of the wall. I assume you meant 5 lbs, because the person who loaded that package would be at fault for loading such a heavy package so high. Ultimately, I'm not sure if we're talking about this issue within a legal framework, or a moral one, so it is difficult to say who should be responsible. I work by the company's own motto, "I am the person most responsible for my safety". I use it to justify doing things the way I believe will keep me the healtiest the longest, which isn't always the way the company wants things done.

The way packages go through the system my opinion is that UPS should pay all claims of damages that occur while in their care.

UPS should not accept packages not suitable their system.

I've seen this for years. Similar to "blame the worker " behavior based safety, this is "blame the shipper" behavior based claims reduction.

Deny all claims, improper packaging.

You seem to have been indoctrinated.

50lbs was the stated weight.

Are you saying management (UPS) doesn't want you to follow all safe work methods and training?

 

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

Worker's Comp often limits correct compensation even when injury is permanent.

That's what lawyers are for

 

[Integrity]

That's what lawyers are for

Better be a good one.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

The way packages go through the system my opinion is that UPS should pay all claims of damages that occur while in their care.

UPS should not accept packages not suitable their system.

I've seen this for years. Similar to "blame the worker " behavior based safety, this is "blame the shipper" behavior based claims reduction.

Deny all claims, improper packaging.

You seem to have been indoctrinated.

50lbs was the stated weight.

Are you saying management (UPS) doesn't want you to follow all safe work methods and training?

If UPS didn't accept packages packed in accordance with our guidelines, our volume would decrease drastically. Have you ever processed a damage claim? Do you even know that cardboard boxes have seals printed on them that indicate weight capacity and burst strength? Do you know how many damaged packages were too heavy for the box they were packed into? Did you know UPS requires 2" of packaging material between the contents and the box? How many packages actually meet those requirements? How are drivers supposed to know if a package was packed properly or not in order to reject it?

Did you know that loading packages over 40lbs at or above shoulder height is unsafe and not methods?

I won't speak to what "management wants", I know that I accept responsibility for my own safety, and sometimes methods developed as a one-size-fits-all solution to safety are not, in fact, safe for everyone.

I think you need to really define who the company is for when you talk about assigning blame. Guess what, I am UPS, managers are UPS, PT Sups are UPS, corporate is UPS. By definition, when it comes to damage claims, there are only two parties who can take responsibility, the shipper and UPS. I will give you an assignment, design a system for rejecting all improperly packaged volume from ever being picked up, then I will agree that UPS would be responsible for all damaged packages within their system.

As for the original question, there are two parties involved in the case as you described, the employee and the employer. The employer is almost always culpable for any injury occurring on their property. If another employee caused the injury, that employee represents the company, and the company is culpable. Even if the injured employee caused the injury, the company can still be culpable.

 

[Poop Head]

I will give you an assignment, design a system for rejecting all improperly packaged volume from ever being picked up, then I will agree that UPS would be responsible for all damaged packages within their system.

Train and inform all employees on the packaging requirements. Pay them by the hour.

Do you even know that cardboard boxes have seals printed on them that indicate weight capacity and burst strength? Do you know how many damaged packages were too heavy for the box they were packed into? Did you know UPS requires 2" of packaging material between the contents and the box? How many packages actually meet those requirements? How are drivers supposed to know if a package was packed properly or not in order to reject it?

Did you know that loading packages over 40lbs at or above shoulder height is unsafe and not methods?

Dude, it's @Integrity
He knows

 

[km3]

If you think the employee is responsible for this injury please explain.

If you think the company is responsible for this injury please explain.

In the context of this particular injury, the company because that's the way they taught him to do it.

In my building, they teach you to use load stands and unload from the top down...none of this intentional collapsing nonsense. If the same thing happened here, I would say it was the employee's fault.

 

[Integrity]

If UPS didn't accept packages packed in accordance with our guidelines, our volume would decrease drastically.

Less packages more personal attention. That would be good.

I won't speak to what "management wants", I know that I accept responsibility for my own safety, and sometimes methods developed as a one-size-fits-all solution to safety are not, in fact, safe for everyone.

Training methods not applicable to all employees?

I think you need to really define who the company is for when you talk about assigning blame. Guess what, I am UPS, managers are UPS, PT Sups are UPS, corporate is UPS.

UPS is a corporation.

By definition, when it comes to damage claims, there are only two parties who can take responsibility, the shipper and UPS. I will give you an assignment, design a system for rejecting all improperly packaged volume from ever being picked up, then I will agree that UPS would be responsible for all damaged packages within their system.

Look at packaging, make assessment, accept or reject. System designed.

As for the original question, there are two parties involved in the case as you described, the employee and the employer. The employer is almost always culpable for any injury occurring on their property. If another employee caused the injury, that employee represents the company, and the company is culpable. Even if the injured employee caused the injury, the company can still be culpable.

Agreed.

 

[Integrity]

If UPS didn't accept packages packed in accordance with our guidelines, our volume would decrease drastically.

Less packages more personal attention. That would be good.

I won't speak to what "management wants", I know that I accept responsibility for my own safety, and sometimes methods developed as a one-size-fits-all solution to safety are not, in fact, safe for everyone.

Training methods not applicable to all employees?

I think you need to really define who the company is for when you talk about assigning blame. Guess what, I am UPS, managers are UPS, PT Sups are UPS, corporate is UPS.

UPS is a corporation.

By definition, when it comes to damage claims, there are only two parties who can take responsibility, the shipper and UPS. I will give you an assignment, design a system for rejecting all improperly packaged volume from ever being picked up, then I will agree that UPS would be responsible for all damaged packages within their system.

Look at packaging, make assessment, accept or reject. System designed.

As for the original question, there are two parties involved in the case as you described, the employee and the employer. The employer is almost always culpable for any injury occurring on their property. If another employee caused the injury, that employee represents the company, and the company is culpable. Even if the injured employee caused the injury, the company can still be culpable.

Agreed.

 

[1989]

Workers comp is a “no fault” insurance. Nobody’s “fault”. Ups pays the comp claim, unless the employee is lying.

 

[Integrity]

Workers comp is a “no fault” insurance. Nobody’s “fault”. Ups pays the comp claim, unless the employee is lying.

Not sure of point you are trying to make.

 

[UnconTROLLed]

"Safety begins and ends with YOU" by UPS

-U

 

[Integrity]

In the context of this particular injury, the company because that's the way they taught him to do it.

In my building, they teach you to use load stands and unload from the top down...none of this intentional collapsing nonsense. If the same thing happened here, I would say it was the employee's fault.

Does every unloader use a load stand and unload from the top down middle out in your building?

Does every unloader properly utilize the VHE for safe unloading in your building?

Ever see anyone do the dig out the middle collapse the wall method?

 

[1989]

Not sure of point you are trying to make.

Cannot blame the employee.

 

[pickup]

To My Fellow UPS Workers,

The purpose of this discussion thread is not to gripe or complain about conditions at UPS, management, the Union or for that matter anything at all about UPS. The sole purpose of this discussion thread is to discuss the following work-related issue with other employees as an initial step in engaging in some concerted activity to bring this issue up to the company as a group.

It is my hope that by addressing this issue in concert we not only be working for our own mutual aid, protection and improved working conditions, but we will be working for the benefit of any and all coworkers that may have been adversely affected by this issue.

In the past UPS has been accused in the press of using “blame the worker” behavior based safety programs. Slogans like “Safety by Choice, Not by Chance”, Safety is Everyone’s Responsibility and safety recognition and rewards for “injury free areas”, management control of Union Safety Committees, and workers being disciplined with immediate warning letters as a result of reporting an injury may be indicative that this problem does exist.

Consider the following Struck by Injury:

This injury is a real injury that actually happened approximately 26 years ago. The injured employee was a 2 week Preload Employee working in the unload operation.

The employee was unloading in the typical way of digging out the middle of the wall and letting the sides collapse into the middle. Obviously this method is and has been widely used and accepted as the fastest way to unload. I still observe this unload method being taught and encouraged in the operation, as it obviously was 26 years ago as well.

Unfortunately when one of the walls started to tilt an automobile part which I believe was a gear to a clutch or transmission slid out of the open box from the top of the wall and struck him in the leg. It was a massive laceration and a severe injury.

I never saw this employee again. Not sure what the outcome was but I think this situation provides some information for discussion.

For Discussion:

If you think the employee is responsible for this injury please explain.

If you think the company is responsible for this injury please explain.

At some point , I thought the above was going to be Integrity’s secret origin story, sort of like he fell into a vat of Integrity and learned that with great power came great responsibility.

Alas, I was wrong.

 

[Integrity]

"Safety begins and ends with YOU" by UPS

-U

That may be but here is the truth:
https://www.osha.gov/Publications/osha3165.pdf

 

[Integrity]

Cannot blame the employee.

I agree.

Unfortunately employees often get disciplined as a result of reporting a workplace injury?

Warning letter anyone?

 

[km3]

Does every unloader use a load stand and unload from the top down middle out in your building?

No.

every unloader properly utilize the VHE for safe unloading in your building?

No.

Ever see anyone do the dig out the middle collapse the wall method?

They collapse it anywhere they want. But they were trained not to do it that way. It's on them now.

 

[km3]

I agree.

Unfortunately employees often get disciplined as a result of reporting a workplace injury?

Warning letter anyone?

I'm pretty sure that's illegal in my state. I hope to never be injured in this place again, but if I am they better not try that on me.

 

[km3]

No.



No.



They collapse it anywhere they want. But they were trained not to do it that way. It's on them now.

But I suppose it does depend on context, so I'll put it another way:

If the company provided load stands and trained people to use them, and employees don't, it's the employee's fault.

If the company did not provide load stands, even though it did train people to use them, it's the company's fault.

If the company neither provided nor trained employees to use load stands, it's the company's fault.