Loss Control Management

History and Philosophy of

Loss Control
Overview & Outline
—  Historical Background on
Safety
—  Milestones of Safety
—  Progress of Safety Movement
and OSH Legislation
—  Understanding Stress and
How to Control it.
History and Philosophy of
LOSS CONTROL

The Historical
Background
on Safety
Code of Hammurabi
King of Babylonia 2200 BC
q  Punishment for “overseers of injuries” if they did not
perform their job.
q  If a worker lost an arm due to a supervisor’s / overseer’s
mistake, the overseer’s arm will be taken as well.
q  If a builder build a house for a man and do not make its
construction firm and the house which he has built
collapse and cause the death of the owner of the house –
that builder shall be put to death.
q  If it cause the death of the son of the owner of the house
– they shall put to death a son of that builder.
Code of Hammurabi
King of Babylonia 2200 BC
q  If it cause the death of a slave of the owner of the house –
he shall give to the owner of the house a slave of equal value.
q  If it destroys property, he shall restore whatever it
destroyed, and because he did not make the house which
he built firm and it collapsed, he shall rebuild the house
which collapsed at his own expense.
q  If a builder build a house for a man and do not make its
construction meet the requirements and a wall fall in, that
builder shall strengthen the wall at his own expense.
Historical Background
—  Industrial Revolution - England in 1837
—  Progress in Industrial Safety before 1911
–  Nonexistent (U.S.)
—  Progress after 1911 (U.S.)
—  Progress after 1931 (U.S.)
The Industrial Revolution – 1837
—  The extensive use of power
machinery initially imported from
England, during a time referred to as
the Industrial Revolution;
—  It ushered in a period of work deaths
and disability never seen before or
since.
The Industrial Revolution – 1837
q  The greatest upsurge in industrial
growth occurred around 1880 with the
rapid increase of steel production.
q  Weaving machines & equipment
(slow hand or manual) – then
steam and later by electricity.
q  Mass Production…use of
machineries
q  …New Technology
The Industrial Revolution – 1837
q  But Labor force was untrained and
unskilled.
q  No Labor Standard / No regulation
q  No control in child labor
The Worker’s Plight - 1900

q  11 to 13 Hrs. Exposure to Accident

Potential - No Standard & Regulation
q  Public sympathy rises.
•  Labor Organization Started
Pittsburgh Survey – 1909
(Completed at Pennsylvania)

q  Revealed that 526 Fatal Industrial

Accidents occurred in this county alone
during the 12 months of 1906-1907
q  Over 30,000 Fatal Industrial Injuries in
the US in the same year (1909)

1600 of 2200 employees lost time

from work because of injury during a
four year period (1900’s) at one of the
steel company at Pennsylvania.
A Demand for Change:
Legislative Progress
—  1870 – Employer’s Liability Acts
ü  First corrective measures to address the problem
—  1897 – first true compensation act was passed by
the British Parliament
—  1907 – The British Act also served as a model for the
first compensation law in the US (1908)
—  1911 – The Compensation Law of Wisconsin (first
significant legislation in the US)
—  1913 – The US Dept. of Labor was created
—  1915 – The American Society of Safety Engrs was
organized.
Comprehensive Federal Law in US
—  1948
– all states in the US had workmen’s
compensation laws
—  1970 – US Congress passed OSHA of 1970
Safety Before
—  Progress in industrial safety was
practically non-existent
—  With No Workmen Compensation
Laws, and No Safety Labor Standard,
all industrial injuries handled only
under the “COMMON LAW”
•  Were employee did not automatically
receive payments when injured on the job
Safety Before
—  Before workmen’s compensation
legislation, the injured employee had
to sue his employer for recompense
—  When the employee did sue, the
employer had four (4) legal defense –
if he could show any of the following,
he would not have to pay the injured
employee:
The Common Law
1.  The employee Contributed to the cause of the accident.

2.  Another employee contributed to the cause of the

accident.
3.  The employee knew of the hazards involved in the
accident before the injury was sustained and still
agreed to work in the condition for pay.
4.  There was no employer negligence.
Early Attitudes on Safety
P  “I don’t have money for frills like safety.”
Not included in Budget.
P  “Some people are just accident prone and
no matter what you do, they hurt
themselves some way.”
P  “… 90% of all accidents
are caused by just plain
carelessness.”
P  “We’re not in business for
safety.”
Milestones
?  Compensation Act - England 1897
?  Compensation Law - U.S. 1911
?  Workmen’s Compensation Act
–  Canada 1915
?  U.S. Congress Passed the Occupational
Safety and Health Act of 1970
?  PD442 (Labor Code of the Philippines) - 1974
◦  Philippines Occupational Safety and Health
Standards (1978)…Amended in 1989
◦  D.O. 13 (1998)
Positive Attitudes
ð  “Safety doesn’t require extra time.
ð  On the other hand, unsafe practices, particularly
those resulting in injuries and property damage, are
time-consuming and costly.”
ð  “The main reason for success in safety is the day-
by-day and hour-by-hour consistency with which you
apply the principles of our safety program.”
ð  Safety Management is the responsibility of all levels
of the company’s management, but must be driven
by top management. Its implementation involves all
personnel in the organization.
Lessons Learned
—  Past Efforts Were Narrow

—  Progress Has Been Made

—  Systems / Standard Approach

—  Performance and Results

SAFETY
FIRST
When Mr. Albert Judge Gary, Chairman
of US Steel Co, adopted “Safety First”
concept as corporate business principle
and conducted various measures,
number of accidents have been
decreased and at the same time, quality
of products was improved and
productivity was increased and thus the
company has become prosperous.
The term “Safety First” has become
popular based on the above fact.
22
Review
—  Historical Background

—  Milestones

—  Early Attitudes on Safety

and Loss Control

—  Lessons Learned