CONSTRUCTION SAFETY AND HEALTH

PERFORMANCE IN DUBAI

A Dissertation (D31ZZ)
Presented in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree Master
of Construction Project Management in the Graduate School of Built and
Environment, Heriot Watt University

By

MICHAEL KOSMAN SADEK ZEKRI

H00112628

AUGUST 2013
Statement of Authorship

DECLARATION

I, MICHAEL ZEKRI, confirm that this work submitted for assessment is my own and
is expressed in my own words. Any uses made within it of the works of other authors in
any form (e.g. ideas, equations, figures, text, tables, programmes) are properly
acknowledged at the point of their use. A full list of the references employed has been
included.

Signed: …………………………….

Date: ……………………………..

i
Table of Contents

Statement of Authorship .................................................................................................... i

Table of Contents .............................................................................................................. ii

List of Tables.................................................................................................................... vi

List of figures .................................................................................................................. vii

Acknowledgments ..........................................................................................................viii

Abstract ............................................................................................................................ ix

Glossary of abbreviations.................................................................................................. x

1. Chapter-I: Introduction.............................................................................................. 1

1.1. Background of Study .......................................................................................... 1

1.2. Statement of the Problem .................................................................................... 1

1.3. The Significance of Study ................................................................................... 2

1.4. Aim of the Study ................................................................................................. 3

1.5. Objectives of the Study ....................................................................................... 3

1.6. Questions of the Study ........................................................................................ 3

1.7. Rational for the Study ......................................................................................... 3

1.8. Limitations of the Study...................................................................................... 4

1.9. Basic Assumptions of the Study ......................................................................... 4

1.10. Methodology of the Study .................................................................................. 4

1.11. The Organization of Study .................................................................................. 5

2. Chapter-II: Literature Review ................................................................................... 6

2.1. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 6

2.2. History of Safety and Health............................................................................... 6

2.3. Construction Safety and Health in the Middle East ............................................ 8

2.4. Construction Safety and Health in UAE ............................................................. 9

ii
 2.5. Factors Affecting Safety and Health Performance ........................................... 11

2.5.1. Complexity of the design ........................................................................... 12

2.5.2. The Type of Owners .................................................................................. 12

2.5.3. Weather conditions .................................................................................... 12

2.5.4. Project Cost ................................................................................................ 14

2.5.5. Project Duration ......................................................................................... 15

2.5.6. Safety and Health Policy............................................................................ 15

2.5.7. Accidents / Incidents / Near Miss Report .................................................. 16

2.5.8. Evacuation Plan / Fire drill ........................................................................ 16

2.5.9. Risk Assessment ........................................................................................ 17

2.5.10. Safety and Health Training ........................................................................ 17

2.5.11. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) ....................................................... 18

2.5.12. Emergency Planning and Procedures ........................................................ 18

2.5.13. Safety and Health Inspections.................................................................... 19

2.5.14. Safety and Health Management Meetings ................................................. 19

2.5.15. First-Aid Arrangements ............................................................................. 19

2.5.16. Welfare Facilities ....................................................................................... 20

2.5.17. Safety Signals, Signs and Barricades ......................................................... 20

2.5.18. Work environment ..................................................................................... 21

2.5.19. Reward and Punishment System (Incentives) ........................................... 21

2.5.20. Role of Government and Engineering Societies ........................................ 22

3. Chapter III: Methodology ....................................................................................... 23

3.1. Introduction ....................................................................................................... 23

3.2. Study Design ..................................................................................................... 23

3.3. Study Location .................................................................................................. 24

3.4. Study Population ............................................................................................... 24

3.5. Sample Size ....................................................................................................... 24

3.6. Pilot Study......................................................................................................... 25

iii
 3.7. Questionnaire Design ........................................................................................ 26

4. Chapter IV: Data Analysis ...................................................................................... 28

4.1. Introduction ....................................................................................................... 28

4.2. Company and Current Project Information....................................................... 28

4.2.1. Job Title of Respondents............................................................................ 28

4.2.2. Contractors Classification .......................................................................... 29

4.2.3. Working Experience of Company ............................................................. 29

4.2.4. Company Expenditures on Safety and Health ........................................... 29

4.2.5. Type of Projects ......................................................................................... 31

4.2.6. Total Number of Employees ...................................................................... 31

4.2.7. Cost of Construction (AED Million) ......................................................... 31

4.2.8. Duration of Construction (Month) ............................................................. 32

4.2.9. Respondent – Working Experience (year) ................................................. 33

4.2.10. Total Man-hours Worked........................................................................... 33

4.3. Safety and Health Manpower............................................................................ 34

4.3.1. Safety and Health Administration Staff ..................................................... 34

4.3.2. Certified Safety and Health Persons at workplace ..................................... 36

4.4. Accidents Causes, Outcomes and Reasons ....................................................... 38

4.4.1. History of Fatality Accidents ..................................................................... 38

4.4.2. Cause of Injury........................................................................................... 39

4.4.3. Treatment Outcome Details ....................................................................... 40

4.4.4. Causal Factors Causing Accidents ............................................................. 41

4.5. Authority Rules and Actions ............................................................................. 41

4.5.1. Safety and Health Inspection by Authority................................................ 42

4.5.2. Safety and Health Certificates to Work by Authority ................................ 43

4.6. Evaluation of Factors Affecting the Safety and Health Performance ............... 44

4.7. Analysis for Agreement of Ranking ................................................................. 45

5. Chapter V: Conclusions and Recommendations ..................................................... 46

iv
 5.1. Summary of the Study ...................................................................................... 46

5.2. Conclusions ....................................................................................................... 46

5.3. Recommendations ............................................................................................. 48

5.4. Future work ....................................................................................................... 49

References ....................................................................................................................... 50

Appendix ......................................................................................................................... 57

Appendix A – Sample of Questionnaire Used For the Survey ................................... 58

Appendix B – Certificate of Conformity Forms ......................................................... 62

Appendix C – RII Calculation Details ........................................................................ 66

Appendix D – Kendall coefficient of concordance (W) Calculation .......................... 70

v
List of Tables

Table 1 - The most common causes of injuries in U.K. - 2011-2012 ............................... 2

Table 2 - summary of factors affecting the safety and health performance .................... 11
Table 3 - Required number of first aiders ....................................................................... 19
Table 4 - Numbers of registered contractors in DM 2013 .............................................. 24
Table 5 - Classification of sample size ........................................................................... 26
Table 6 - Factors affecting the safety and health performance in construction projects. 27
Table 7 - Classification of participated companies under each authority ....................... 29
Table 8 - Relation between the level of satisfaction and the category of the company .. 30
Table 9 - Relation between the level of satisfaction and the govern authority ............... 30
Table 10 - Type of current projects surveyed ................................................................. 31
Table 11 - Respondent – Working Experience (year) ..................................................... 33
Table 12 - Total man-hours worked ................................................................................ 33
Table 13 - Distribution of safety and health administration staff ................................... 35
Table 14 - (A) Distribution of certified safety and health persons at workplace ............ 36
Table 15 - (B) Distribution of certified safety and health persons at workplace ............ 37
Table 16 - Number of fatality during work from 2005 to 2012 ...................................... 38
Table 17 - Year of fatality during work .......................................................................... 38
Table 18 - Fatality category ............................................................................................ 39
Table 19 - Cause of injury in construction sites - rates ................................................... 39
Table 20 - Rate of treatment outcome details ................................................................. 40
Table 21 - Rate of the causal factors causing accidents .................................................. 41
Table 22 - Rate of safety and health inspection by authority.......................................... 42
Table 23 - RII and ranking of safety and health performance factors ............................ 45

vi
List of figures

Figure 1 - Contribution of construction activity in GDP at current prices in Dubai. ........ 4

Figure 2 - Humidex from temperature and relative humidity readings .......................... 13
Figure 3 - Job titles of respondents ................................................................................. 28
Figure 4 - Level of satisfaction against company’s category and the govern authority . 30
Figure 5 - Total number of employees ............................................................................ 31
Figure 6 - Cost of construction (Million Dirhams) ......................................................... 32
Figure 7 - Duration of construction (Month) .................................................................. 32
Figure 8 - Total man-hours worked ................................................................................ 34
Figure 9 - Distribution of safety and health administration staff .................................... 35
Figure 10 - Distribution of certified safety and health persons at workplace ................. 37
Figure 11 - Distribution of fatality accidents among companies .................................... 38
Figure 12 - Cause of injury in construction sites - rates ................................................. 39
Figure 13 - Rate of treatment outcome details ................................................................ 40
Figure 14 - Rate of the causal factors causing accidents ................................................ 41
Figure 15 - Rate of safety and health inspection by authority ........................................ 42
Figure 16 - Authority performance regarding issuing safety and health certificates ...... 43
Figure 17 - Safety and health certificates issued by all authorities ................................. 43

vii
Acknowledgments

I want to acknowledge and thank a number of individuals who have made important
assistances to the development of this dissertation. I would firstly like to thank my
supervisor, Dr. Hagir Hakim who inspired me to complete this dissertation; Heriot Watt
library and their massive resources of data and information; Dubai government and their
transparency of providing all data and statistics online; safety and health professionals
who helped to design the questionnaire; my beautiful wife who supported and encouraged
me for the last two years to complete this master degree. I would also like to acknowledge
the persons who took share in this dissertation.

I am mindful of a quote which has provided me with motivation and inspiration

throughout this dissertation.

“We have succeeded because we have always believed that tomorrow is a new day, that
yesterday's achievements are in the past and that history will record what we achieve in
the future, not what we have achieved in the past.”

H.H. Shaikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum

viii
Abstract

Researchers had agreed that, construction industry one of the most hazardous industries
worldwide due to its unique nature. The environment of the construction industry is risky
which make it very essential to pay more attention to improve the construction safety and
health at the workplace. Few studies had been conducted in construction safety and health
performance in UAE. However, no study yet had been published for the Emirate of Dubai
to identify the safety and health performance among companies and authorities. Fifty-
eight (58) construction companies that were qualified and registered in Government of
Dubai – Department of Economic Development and classified as first, second and third
categories which are working in Dubai under DM, DTMFZA, and TRAKHEES had
participated in this study. The objectives of this study are to analyse the performance of
each category of construction companies and each govern authority, to identify the factors
affecting the construction safety and health performance, and to improve the safety and
health of construction companies and authorities. Twenty factors (20) were identified
through literature review and conducted in the questionnaire survey. The degree of impact
of these factors on safety and health performance were evaluated based on a five point
Likert scale. The collected data were evaluated and the RII for each factor were found,
consequently these factors were ranked and tested for agreement. The ranks were varied
among each category and total ranks were established for these factors to all categories.
It was concluded that the most important main factors affecting the safety and health
performance in Dubai are; work environment, safety signals, signs and barricades, project
cost, the role of government and engineering societies, and PPE. Other factors were
important for the first category of construction companies like; safety and health policy,
risk assessment, and safety and health inspection which should be more valuable for the
rest of categories. Moreover, TRAKHEES had the best performance regarding the
implementation of safety and health regulations comparing with DM and DTMFZA. At
last, to improve the safety and health performance of construction companies and
authorities, a set of recommendations were suggested and future researches were
proposed.

ix
Glossary of abbreviations

AFR Accident Frequency Rate

ANSI American National Standards Institute
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
COC Certificate of Conformity
DEC Dubai Economic Council
DSC Dubai Statistics Centre
DM Dubai Municipality
DTMFZA Dubai Technology And Media Free Zone Authority
EU European Union
HSE Health and Safety Excusive
ILO International Labour Organization
JAFZA Jebel Ali Free Zone Authority
OHS Occupational health and safety
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PPE Personal Protective Equipment
RII Relative Importance Index
UAE United Arab Emirates
U.K The United Kingdom
U.S.A The United States of America
WHO World Health Organization

x
1. Chapter-I: Introduction

1.1.Background of Study
Construction sites are still one of the most dangerous workplaces because of high
incidence of accidents, (Kines, et al., 2007). The construction industry is
characterized by its fragmented structure in the production phase and it needs for
coordination of different interdependent trades and operations. The nature of the
construction work is dangerous and risky which make safety and health are issues
to be considered and advocated the idea that safety and health of persons are no
luxury but a necessity, (Tam, et al., 2004).

In the past few years the safety and health awareness has been increased in the
construction industry because the improvement of safety and health culture.
(Fung, et al., 2005), found that, the positive safety culture helps controlling and
reducing the construction costs and increasing work efficiency. So, for the
benefits of the construction companies are to take the necessary actions to manage
safety and health on workplace, (Koehn, et al., 1995). Large construction
companies have better safety and health management performance than the
medium and small companies (Hinze & Harrison, 1981); (Hinze & Raboud,
1988), which often have informal safety and health programs, (Tam, et al., 2004).

1.2.Statement of the Problem

Safety and health are always been a frequent issue in the construction industry due
to its unique and dangerous nature.

In United Kingdom (U.K), it was reported that in 2011-2012, the construction

industry had (49) fatal injuries accounts (28%) of fatal injuries of the industry
sections. There were (2230) reported major injuries and (5391) reported over (3-
day) injuries. Even those numbers are lower than previous years, but still consider
to be very high compared to another industry see (Table 1). Falls were the main
cause of fatalities accidents. However, handling was the main cause of over three
day injuries, (HSE, 2013).

1
Table 1 - The most common causes of injuries in U.K. - 2011-2012
Major Over Three
Injury Kind Fatalities
Injuries Day Injuries
Falls 51% 29% 10%
Being struck by a falling/moving
16% 13% 12%
object
A collapse 10% - -
Being hit by a moving vehicle 4% - -
Electricity 10% - -
Slips, trips and falls on the level - 25% 23%
Handling - 11% 31%

In the United States of America (U.S.A), fatal injuries in the private construction
sector were (721) cases in 2011, which made construction to be in the second
position of the most fatal industry of all sectors. Even it was decreased (42%) of
2006 statistics, but obviously this was due to the recession and the decreasing of
the construction industry, (BLS, 2012). The construction industry in the European
Union (EU), estimated to have (2744) fatal injuries in 2010 of a total (4395) cases
of all industries, (Eurostat, 2012).

Previous statistics showed that, the industry has a very poor safety and health
performance record, (Chua & Goh, 2004). Thus, this study intends to examine the
health and safety performance in the construction industry in Dubai. Generally,
workers are the main reasons behind accidents, but management is responsible for
the prevention of accidents or incidents, (Petersen, 1971). So, the management
failures consider to have the real reason behind accidents as by law, (Fang, et al.,
2004). Therefore, reviewing sometimes hard lessons of the past can contribute to
a safer future.

1.3.The Significance of Study

Humanitarian concern, economic considerations and legal considerations are the
main reasons which make the safety and health are important. So, injuries,
illnesses, or damages due to accidents in construction industry are often costly in
regard of financial and human terms. Therefore, safety and health are concerned
with reducing the rates of injuries, illnesses, or eliminating the hazards at the
workplace, to reduce that cost. So, preventing accidents is the main significant
point to improve the safety and health in the construction industry and that can be
achieved by increasing the awareness of all concerned persons and by identifying
areas of safety and health deficiencies in construction industry. It is to the
2
 advantage of construction companies to identify the factors affecting construction
safety and health performance. This will support the construction companies to
take the essential provisions to control these factors before they happen and to be
aware of them when they arise during construction. This will lead to improve the
overall performance of the company and enhance the safety and health record. So
it is a recognised way of growing morale and productivity of workers which in
turn improves the company's image. Accordingly, this study is to benefit the
construction industry in particular and all industries in general.

1.4.Aim of the Study

The aim of the study is to evaluate and improve the construction safety and health
performance in Dubai.

1.5.Objectives of the Study

 Assessing, the level of the safety and health performance in construction
companies and evaluating the authorities’ performance.
 Identifying and analysing, the most important factors that affect safety and health
performance in construction projects.
 Exploring methods to implement occupational safety and health best practise.

1.6.Questions of the Study

What is the relation between safety and health performance, the category of the
construction companies, and govern authority in Dubai?

How to improve the construction safety and health performance in Dubai?

1.7.Rational for the Study

United Arab Emirates (UAE) is one of the fastest growing and most developed
country in the Middle East. Dubai witnessed an extraordinary growth in
construction industry in the last decade. Major iconic projects were constructed
during that time like Burj Khalifa, Dubai Mall, Dubai Metro, Dubai Airport
Terminal 3, Dubai artificial archipelago, and thousands of residential, commercial
and industrial projects. According to the organizers of the Conmex construction
machinery exhibition, the number of cranes which were operating in Dubai was
approximately 25% of the total cranes operating in the world, (GulfNews, 2006).
Rapid growth of the construction industry in Dubai is often accompanied by
frequent occurrences of construction accidents. After analysing the data obtained
from Dubai Statistics Centre (DSC) and Dubai Economic Council (DEC), it is
3
obvious in 2008 the construction industry was at its best and decreased gradually
to reach (8%) in the third quarter of 2012 due to the consequence of the world
recession in 2008, (DSC, 2013); (DEC, 2013), see (Figure 1). In other words, the
contribution of the construction sector in Dubai GDP, make it an important
industry of Dubai economic.

Figure 1 - Contribution of construction activity in GDP at current prices in

Dubai.
16.00%
13.60%
14.00% 12.7…
12.00% 11.90%
12.00% 11.00% 11.20%
11.80% 11.7… 9.40%
10.00% 8.50% 8.00%
8.00%
8.00%
8.00%
6.00%
4.00%
2.00%
0.00%
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014
Contribution of construction activity in GDP at current prices in Dubai

Only few studies had been conducted in the construction industry about health and
safety performance in UAE, while no studies about Emirate of Dubai had been
published so far which led to the need of this study.

1.8.Limitations of the Study

The study is limited to the medium and large construction companies in Dubai
that are classified as First, Second, and Third categories in building works. 2013
is the year which reflect the current state of the study.

1.9.Basic Assumptions of the Study

The study aim the contracting companies only in Dubai, as main contractors are
the focal point. Only first, second and third categories of building contracting
companies are to be considered in this study.

1.10. Methodology of the Study

The study methodology will include steps, which can be summarized in the
following points:

First, carry out a review of previous works which were concerned to the subject
of this study. The purpose of the review is to demonstrate the history of safety

4
 and health performance worldwide, and to identify the factors that affect the safety
and health performance in construction companies.

Second, collect data via a questionnaire survey to assess the safety and health
performance of construction companies and govern authorities, and to evaluate
the factors that affect the safety and health performance identified in the literature
review.

Third, perform analysis of data using appropriate statistical techniques.

Fourth, ranking results in relation to their importance, and testing the results for
the degree of agreement.

Fifth, Report and discuss results and major findings to introduce conclusions and
recommendations.

1.11. The Organization of Study

This study is divided into five chapters, references and appendixes. It includes the
following:

 Chapter I, presents an introduction to the study which includes: the background,

the statement of the problem, significance, aim, objectives, questions, rational,
limitations, assumptions, methodology, and the organization of study
 Chapter II, presents the literature review which includes the history of safety and
health performance in worldwide, in the Middle East, and in UAE. Further, it
includes the studies and researches which had been made to identifying the factors
affecting the safety and health performance in the construction industry.
 Chapter III, discusses the study methodology which includes: information about
the study design, study location, study population, pilot study, and the
questionnaire design.
 Chapter IV, presents and discusses, the statistical data analysis of the results
obtained from the questionnaire survey, and the tables and graphics deduced from
statistical analysis and statistical results.
 Chapter V, summarizes the results and major finding, to present the conclusions,
recommendations of this research, and a proposal of future works.

5
2. Chapter-II: Literature Review

2.1.Introduction
First part of this chapter, describes the stages which health and safety issue came
through since the early beginning. Moreover, it shows the performance of health
and safety in the Middle East and then in UAE. Second part demonstrates the
factors affecting health and safety performance in construction industry.

2.2.History of Safety and Health

“We must seek to understand the hazards we live with.” This was maybe the
earliest documented safety statement which announced by E. I. du Pont during
establishing the gunpowder factory in U.S.A in 1802. As it had the first safety
precautions which were taken into consideration during the design and construct
of the building, (Klein, 2009). However, it was individual act by employer and
was not law or regulation.

From early beginning till 1916, all works were under “the common laws”, which
made the employees were responsible about themselves and the risks of their
works. After 1916, the workers’ compensation law were deemed by the
government which enforce the employers to be responsible for their workplaces'
safety and health. Subsequently, the employers required to provide and pay for
medical care and lost wages due to on-the-job incidents. This is a moral
responsibility before it is a duty, (Reese, 2003). However, as the law enforce the
employers to pay for injuries occurring on the work place, it will be better
financially to stop the injuries from happening at first place. Eliminating the
hazardous that exist in the work places was the first step to make an organized
industrial safety movement. During the first twenty (20) years of the safety
movement, the death rate declined significantly, (Petersen, 1971). On April 1971,
Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHAct) became effective and applied to
more than five (5) million businesses including sixty (60) million workers in
U.S.A, (Hammer & Price, 2000).

Occupational health and safety (OHS) management protects the safety, health, and
welfare of people at the workplace. The International Labour Organization (ILO)

6
 and the World Health Organization (WHO) have shared a common definition of
occupational health. The definition reads:

“Occupational health should aim at: the promotion and maintenance of the
highest degree of physical, mental and social well-being of workers in all
occupations; the prevention amongst workers of departures from health caused
by their working conditions; the protection of workers in their employment from
risks resulting from factors adverse to health; the placing and maintenance of the
worker in an occupational environment adapted to his physiological and
psychological capabilities; and, to summarize, the adaptation of work to man and
of each man to his job”, (Guidotti, 2011).

Safety defined as the condition of being protected against any type of events
(accidents) which could be considered non-desirable by controlling hazards to
achieve an acceptable level of risk. Accident defined as some sudden and
unexpected event taking place without expectation that causes injury, damages or
death, (Mwombeki, 2005).

In construction project management, it is well known that each construction

project is unique. So, the occurrence of accidents are vary from project to another
which means that: one site could be more dangerous than the other, (Seixas, et al.,
1998). Likewise, the working environment is constantly changing and inherent
risks change daily, (Jannadi & Bu-Khamsin, 2002).

Several organizations are setting guides, standards, regulations, and training for
safety and health in the construction industry which can be implemented
internationally or nationally according to the publishing organization and the local
authority. For example of the organizations which are responsible for safety and
health practices:

 In U.S.A: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) for setting

standards. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
responsible for conducting researches and studies.
 In U.K: National Examination Board in Occupational Safety and Health
(NEBOSH). The Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH) is an
organization for health and safety professionals. International Institute of Risk
and Safety Management (IIRSM) is a professional body for health and safety
practitioners.
7
 In Asia Pacific Region: Asia Pacific Occupational Safety and Health Organization
(APOSH) is an organization dedicated to promote occupational safety and health
practices.
 In Australia: The Safety Institute of Australia (SIA) is professional body for health
& safety professionals aims to develop, maintain and promote a body of
knowledge that defines professional practice in Occupational health and safety
(OHS).

The variance in occupational health and safety standards between different

countries has been cited as a major route of the international transfer or acquisition
of health risks, (Alleyne, 1997).

2.3.Construction Safety and Health in the Middle East

Generally, the Middle East have the same safety and health conditions as those in
developing countries. However, no one can deny that there are safety and health
improvements in the construction industry for the last few years.

In the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (K.S.A), the construction industry had (48%) of
all occupational injuries in 2011. Further, (29%) of construction injuries were due
to falling, while (32%) were due to struck by a falling/moving object, (GOSI,
2011).

In Egypt, (33%) of construction injuries were found because of falling in 2008.

Further, it is found that the work models used in construction firms in Egypt have
a noticeable difference between those in the EU and U.S.A, (ElSafty, et al., 2012).
A study of the Egyptian construction industry concluded that safety programs
applied by contractors operating in Egypt were less formal and the accident
insurance costs were fixed irrespective of the contractor’s safety performance,
(Hassanein & Hanna, 2008).

In Kuwait, it was found that tools accidents had (16.9%) of injuries and fall from
ladder or scaffolding contributed (23.3%) of total construction injuries in 1999,
(Al-Tabtabai, 2002). However, in 2007 it were found that falling were the major
type of accident (33.2%) followed by being struck by falling/moving object
(25.2%), then misuse of tools had (18.1%), (Al-Humaidi & Tan, 2010). It were
observed that the problems arise due to: disorganized labour; poor accident record
keeping and reporting system; the extensive use of foreign labours; the extensive
use of subcontractors; lack of safety regulations and legislation; the low priority
8
given to safety; the small size of most construction firms; competitive tendering;
and severe weather conditions during the summer. Moreover, one of the most
prevailing problems in Middle East countries is that workers and engineers receive
almost no safety training and are mostly uninformed about the company's safety
programs or policies (Kartam, et al., 2000).

2.4.Construction Safety and Health in UAE

Only few studies had been conducted in the construction industry about health and
safety performance in UAE, while no studies about Emirate of Dubai had been
published so far which led to the need of this study.

First published study was conducted in 2002 by (Noura Al-Kaabi) under the title
“Construction safety performance in the United Arab Emirates”. Total (120)
construction companies from Dubai and Abu Dhabi had participated in the survey.
The study showed in construction companies that: (25%) do not provide PPE to
their workers; (21%) do not have fire safety measures; (26%) do not have a first
aid kit; (34%) do not have safety personnel on the site; (63%) had fatal accidents
in the past; (16%) do not keep records of accidents. In addition, the existing labour
law is deemed insufficient to enforce the compliance of safety measures on
construction sites, (Al-Kaabi & Hadipriono, 2003).

Second published study was conducted in 2012 by (Shibani et al.) under the title
“Health and safety influence on the construction project performance in United
Arab Emirates (UAE)”. Total (130) construction and oil companies in UAE had
participated in the survey. The study showed in construction companies that:
(69%) have a serious lack of understanding of H&S policy importance; (71%)
have no training of workers and (74%) believe that such training, when existent,
is outdated; (87%) strongly agree that there exist cultural barriers to adhesion to
H&S procedures, although (91%) said they were not made aware of such barriers;
(86%) of respondents admitted that they did not adhered to accident reporting
procedures, and (83%) admitted not recording accidents; and, (71%) of
respondents said that they were not provided with means of recording accidents
which explains why only (54%) carry out any follow up action following an
accident, (Shibani, et al., 2012).

In 2004, an independent research by a construction trade publication found that

approximately (88) Indians had died in construction site accidents in Dubai.

9
However, only (34) cases of death officially reported for all nationalities by the
government. So, there were a gap between the two figures, which was also
confirmed by the report of Human Rights Watch in November 2006, (Ghaemi,
2009). Further, the report of Human Right Watch in March 2012 found that
workers are struggling in the construction industry in UAE in spite of some
improvements in working conditions, (HRW, 2012). After surveying
Gulfnews.com, there were (38) fatalities accidents published by reporters only
because of Scaffolding and roof collapsed from 2002 to 2012 in Dubai.

As per 2010 – UAE - Ministry of Labours - statistics, (40%) of total workforces

are working in the construction industry in UAE. Therefore, safety and health are
regulated respectively by the Ministry of Labour Law No (8) of 1980 Regulating
Labour Relations as amended by Federal Laws No (24) of 1981, No (15) of 1985,
and No (12) of 1986 Law, (Ministry of labour, 2001). Further, there are special
regulations applicable in some of the free zones in UAE. Nonetheless, Dubai is
divided into three main construction’s authorities which are Dubai Municipality
(DM), Dubai Technology and Media Free Zone Authority (DTMFZA), and
TRAKHEES. Each authority has their Jurisdiction which sets regulations and
codes which govern the construction practices under their territories.

Firstly, (DM) is the leading authority which governs the construction industry in
Dubai. (DM) launched a “Code of Construction Safety Practice” in 2001 as it has
been revised in 2004 and latest was revised in 2008. The guide is demonstrating
the roles of contractors and consultants in the construction industry, (DM, 2008).
Secondly, Environment, Health and Safety (EHS) is the regulatory arm of
TRAKHEES which controls, regulates and enforces rules and regulations related
to all aspects of Environment, Health, Safety and Fire Protection. EHS cover all
Dubai World Business Units under the current format of regulations which
documented as “Regulation CS-4.0: Construction Safety Regulations” and revised in
2010, (EHS, 2010). Last, (DTMFZA) is the sole independent regulator of Dubai
Technology and Media Free Zone as it was established in 2000. (DTMFZA) had
published “The Health, Safety and Environment (HSE) Regulations Manual” in
2006 and revised in 2008, which been framed to regulate the working conditions
of any workmen working under a contractor or sub-contractor involved in
construction activities, (DTMFZA, 2008).

10
2.5.Factors Affecting Safety and Health Performance
An extensive literature review has been conducted to identify the factors which
affect the safety and health performance in construction projects see (Table 2).

Table 2 - summary of factors affecting the safety and health performance

Factors Affecting the Safety
S.N and Health Performance in Literature
Construction Industry
(Hinze & Wiegand, 1992), (Kartam, et
1 Complexity of the Design
al., 2000)
(Hinze & Gambatese, 2003), (Report-A-
2 Type of Owners
3, 1982)
(Brake & Bates, 2002), (Neitzel, et al.,
3 Weather Condition
2001)
4 Project Cost (Levitt & Samelson, 1993), (Hinze, 1997)
5 Project Duration (Zou, et al., 2007), (Report-A-3, 1982)
(Sawacha, et al., 1999), (Shibani, et al.,
6 Safety and Health Policy
2012)
(Al-Kaabi & Hadipriono, 2003),
Accidents / Incidents / Near
7 (Hassanein & Hanna, 2008), (Shibani, et
Miss Report
al., 2012)
8 Evacuation Plan / Fire drill (Hislop, 1999), (Tam, et al., 2004)
9 Risk Assessment (Chapman & Ward, 2004), (Agwu, 2012)
(Hinze & Gambatese, 2003), (Teo, et al.,
10 Safety and Health Training
2005), (Kartam, et al., 2000)
Personal Protective (Al-Kaabi & Hadipriono, 2003),
11
Equipment (PPE) (Kenrick, 2012)
Emergency Planning and (Jannadi & Bu-Khamsin, 2002), (Hislop,
12
Procedures 1999)
13 Safety and Health Inspection (Reese, 2003), (Hinze & Raboud, 1988)
Safety and Health (Hinze & Raboud, 1988), (Fang, et al.,
14
Management Meetings 2004)
15 First-Aid Arrangements (DM, 2008), (Fang, et al., 2004)
16 Welfare Facilities (ILO, 1995), (Tam, et al., 2004)
Safety Signals, Signs and (Chapanis, 1994), (Edworthy & Adams,
17
Barricades 1996)
18 Work environment (Mattila, et al., 1994), (Site-Safe, 1999)
Reward and Punishment
19 (Teo, et al., 2005), (Lee & Jaafar, 2012)
System (Incentives)
Role of Government and
20 (Fang, et al., 2004), (Teo, et al., 2005)
Engineering Societies

11
2.5.1. Complexity of the design
Despite the fact that safety and health of workers considered to be the sole
responsibility of the contractor, safety and health performance are largely dictated
by designers’ decisions. Designers shall take into their consideration how the
project components will be assembled and how construction tasks are undertaken.
That is why it is very important that designers shall address the safety and health
requirements into the design and before the project commence, (Hinze &
Wiegand, 1992). However, it was found in Kuwait that (70%) of the designers
are not take safety and health of workers into consideration during the design,
(Kartam, et al., 2000). In the other hand, safety and health performance improve
when designers aware to the safety consequences of their design decisions. This
leads to a reduction in injuries and associated costs and a decrease in redesign
costs and in operating costs for special procedures and protective equipment,
(Hinze & Gambatese, 2003).

2.5.2. The Type of Owners

Owners have a direct economic stake in the safety and health performance of their
contractors because accident costs are an expense to the contractor and are passed
on, one way or another, to the client. Moreover, owners have extended known an
ethical duty to provide a safe work environment to reduce injuries. Therefore,
owner can achieve this duty by signing contractors who have a record of good
safety and health performance. Also, owners can take processes to accomplish
better safety and health performance such as: provide safety and health guidelines
that the contractor must follow; Implement, the use of work permit systems for
potentially harmful activities; Oblige the contractor to elect a responsible
supervisor to coordinate safety in the workplace; Discuss safety at owner-
contractor meetings; Conduct safety audits during construction; Enforce prompt
reporting and full investigation of accidents, (Report-A-3, 1982).

(Hinze & Gambatese, 2003), concluded in their research in the USA that safety
and health performance have better records when the owner is a private
organization.

2.5.3. Weather conditions

Extreme weather conditions have direct effect on safety and health performance.
UAE exposes to an extreme hot weather in the summer time as temperature

12
reaches to 50 degree at some times. Also humidity has proportional relation with
heat, as it increases the feel of heat when humidity increases. It is known as
humidex index which considered to be an indicator for heat stress see (Figure 2).
Midday break firstly introduced in 2005 by UAE government which not allow
workers who exposed to direct sun light to work from 12:30PM to 3:00 PM during
the months of July and August. Later in 2008 the midday break had extended one
month as it shall start from 15th of June till 15th of September, (Trakhees, 2013).

Figure 2 - Humidex from temperature and relative humidity readings

Source: http://accuracyproject.org/humidex.jpg

Heat stress is a serious issue which has a remarkable effect on workers’ health. In
the USA, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Federal OSHA) had
recorded the heat-related fatalities between 2008 and June 2013. The record
shows that in construction industry and its related works had (50) heat-related
fatality cases out of total (96) cases, (OSHA, 2013). There are signs for heat stress
like: nausea, headache, fatigue, excessive thirst, profuse sweating, confusion,
painful large muscle cramps and loss of consciousness. Those signs of heat stress
can lead to heat cramps, heat exhaustion, or heatstroke, which if untreated or
sufficiently severe, may lead to death, (Brake & Bates, 2002).

13
Moreover, the wind might cause disturbance in construction sites. A high speed
wind can go along with sandstorms, especially in the gulf area which eventually
affect visualization and may lead to accidents. Further, workers who are directly
exposed to wind like crane operators, scaffolders, or even who work on roofing,
may get hurt if the appropriate precautions are not taken. So it is important to
check the weather conditions in the working area several times a day to establish
a wind speed at which work shall be suspended, (Neitzel, et al., 2001).

2.5.4. Project Cost

Under the traditional building procurement system, there is reason to explore
substitute materials, procedures, and safety routes as a result of professional
charges being interrelated to the final cost of the project. However, the cost of the
time consumed in exploring substitutes may not be recovered from the owner
under such procurement and contractual arrangements, (Wells, 1986).

In one hand, the construction industry tends to have a low awareness of the long-
term advantages of safe practice, while the tendering procedure frequently gives
little consideration to safety, resulting in cost and corner cutting. On the other
hand, competitive tendering usually results in the choice of the contractor who is
ready to take the major risk or who has made the major mistake. In New Zealand,
the study which conducted in 1997 suggested that cost focussed projects and the
competitive nature of the tender procedure resulted in the deficiency of the
margins and cost cutting of safety. Further, because of economic rewards and
motivations to build more cheaply in the short-term, one of the first areas,
unluckily, to experience cost cutting to recover the affordability of tenders is that
of safety and health, (Porteous, 1999); (Site-Safe, 2000).

Decent codes and standards can improve construction safety and health at least
cost. Then again, poor codes and standards can contribute to increased costs and
disputes with slight impact on construction safety. These costs and disputes arise
from interruptions in construction progress, penalties for these interruptions,
economic losses, personal injuries and fatalities. Research has shown that safe
workplaces and workers increase productivity accompanied by reduced costs and
increased profitability, (Levitt & Samelson, 1993); (Hinze, 1997).

14
2.5.5. Project Duration
(Zou, et al., 2007) Conducted study in China regarding risks as per their
significance in relation to project objectives. And they found that tight project
schedule had high rank on safety performance of the project. Moreover, an
impractical schedule can deeply affect the success of project objectives in terms
of cost, quality, environment and safety. When accidents happen or conflictions
between construction programs arise, the project schedule can be even more
delayed. Apart from the actual costs acquired about injuries and fatalities, the
national economy of any country suffers a massive indirect cost and loss of
productivity due to the number of workdays lost as a result of occupational injuries
and deaths, (Report-A-3, 1982). In addition, speed of work and target deadlines
for the completion specified job, creates more injuries, (Hinze & Raboud, 1988).

Although Canada having a prestigious record in safety and health performance,

but 2010 statistics showed that there were around (158,360) workdays lost due to
accidents in the construction industry only in Alberta which cost them around
($53,959,096) as Compensation payments, (Alberta, 2011).

2.5.6. Safety and Health Policy

A policy is an administrative belief used to set a path in an organization. It can be
a sequence of actions and an effective decisions. (Sawacha, et al., 1999),
discussed numerous variables that effect safety on construction sites. The results
propose that variables correlated to organization policy are the most main group
of factors affecting the safety performance in the U.K. construction industry.
Further, the research shows that: (69%) of construction companies in UAE have
a serious lack of understanding of safety and health policy importance. And all
small construction companies together with 80 % of medium construction
companies do not have written safety and health policy, (Shibani, et al., 2012).

Research found that the reduction of accidents would be accomplished when top
management takes a dynamic attention and is dedicated to safety and health
improvement as well as maintaining good safety and health policy, (Teo, et al.,
2005). Moreover, (Hinze & Raboud, 1988) concluded in their research, that top
management must be supportive to have better health and safety performance.

15
2.5.7. Accidents / Incidents / Near Miss Report
Literature research revealed that in large organizations, managers can count on
accident and incident reports broken down by single projects, which facilities
evaluation among projects on the basis of accident frequency or any other measure
of accident rate. This way, managers are kept knowledgeable about where
accidents are occurring so that they can dedicate their responsiveness to problem
areas, (Hassanein & Hanna, 2008).

(Al-Kaabi & Hadipriono, 2003), found in UAE that numerous companies usually
did not report accident occurrences to the relevant authority. However, over 86%
of reported organizations reported zero accidents. Even though this looks to some
extent encouraging, one may not be totally confident if this figure reflects a correct
zero accidents or if the companies only escaped reporting their accidents, mainly
when these accidents were considered to be minor. Further, (Shibani, et al., 2012),
found that (86%) of respondents acknowledged that they did not stick to accident
reporting procedures, and a similar percentage (83%) admitted not recording
accidents. Added, (71%) they were not provided by means of recording accidents
which explains why only (54%) perform any follow up action following an
accident.

2.5.8. Evacuation Plan / Fire drill

Evacuation plans are established to guarantee the safest and the most well-
organized evacuation time of all expected occupants of a structure. However, a
fire drill is a technique of practicing the evacuation of a structure for mainly a fire
or any other emergency. Prior to construction starts, the contractors must take
into consideration the possible risks that may arise on the construction site.
Contractor’s fire marshals should be aware of the fighting equipment available on
the site and be familiar with its use, (Hislop, 1999). The evacuation plan shall
include: site plans indicating assembly points, locations of fire hydrants and portable
fire extinguishers, normal routes for the access of fire department’s vehicles, emergency
egress or escape routes, and procedures for counting the occupiers after the
evacuation has been completed.

16
2.5.9. Risk Assessment
Several stakeholders are involved in the construction activities, long working
hours, and the interaction between organisational and technological complexity
generates enormous risks, (Zou, et al., 2007). Since construction activities are
subjected to a lot of risks, it becomes vital that these risks essential to be assessed
and managed through a structured risk assessment process. Risk assessment
reflects the likelihood and severity that harm will occur from an identified hazard,
so that appropriate controls may be taken based on the probability and severity of
the potential hazard, (Colling, 1990). Risk assessment is a structured approach
for identifying, evaluating and controlling hazards in the workplace (Chapman &
Ward, 2004) with a view to reaching a better performance of no harm to people
or damage to assets. (Agwu, 2012), found in his study in Nigeria that better safety
and health performance of construction companies is depending on risk
assessment compliance.

2.5.10. Safety and Health Training

It is well recognized in the construction industry that training shows a significant
role for enhancing the workers’ safety and health performance. Training usually
initiates with worker orientation and continues as workers need to become more
educated about certain features of the work they are performing. For example, the
training which is provided to certify the persons who are responsible for erecting
or supervising the scaffolding, as it considers to be the most risky job in the
construction sites. These training sessions can be conducted through various
techniques like worker orientation, safety induction, toolbox talks, or
communication programmes. It may include topics such as worker rights and
responsibilities, falls from elevation, hot work, Electrical safety, personal
protective equipment, first aid and emergency procedures, confined space entry,
and a wide assortment of other topics, whether to be presented updated
information or just to be provided as a refresher on a subject, (Hinze & Gambatese,
2003). Further, education and training sessions help workers to perform various
activities efficiently. It also helps to establish a positive attitude towards safety
and incorporates safety into production and quality goals, (Kartam, et al., 2000).
(Teo, et al., 2005), found in their study in Australia that training has a positive
preventive effect on workers to avoid injury.

17
2.5.11. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)
There are two categories of PPE. The first must be used safety helmet; safety
shoes; and appropriate clothing. The second category depending kind of work,
like eye protection, protective gloves, ear protectors, and the safety harness,
(Jannadi & Bu-Khamsin, 2002). Companies have an obligations to provide the
appropriate PPE to their workers as per UAE Federal Law No. 8 (UAE Ministry
of Labour and Social Affairs 1995). However, the law does not identify when or
where the PPE should be worn; it leaves them to the contractors’ decision. It was
found that (25%) of construction companies in UAE were not provide PPE to their
workers because either it is expensive or it usually reduce the worker’s
productivity. Further, (75%) of companies who provide PPE to their workers had
to make an effort to enforce the workers to use PPE, as some workers refused to
use the PPE due to religious values or cultural issues, (Al-Kaabi & Hadipriono,
2003).

A new study by UAE University found that around two-thirds (2/3) of the hospital
visits involved injuries happened on building sites due to a lack of PPE or
unsuitable PPE were related to the incident that caused the injury. Climate plays
an enormous role in the use of PPE. Hence, if construction workers are not
satisfied with the PPE they have been provided, because it's uncomfortable, feels
unsafe or slows productivity, then they are less likely to use it which dramatically
increases the probability of injuries and illnesses, (Kenrick, 2012).

It is common in the construction industry that PPE means safety of workers.

However, safety is all about how to create the appropriate environment in the
workplace that PPE only to be considered as extra protections for the worst
scenario might occur.

2.5.12. Emergency Planning and Procedures

Effective emergency planning needs the workers to be aware about the emergency
procedures before a crisis occurs. It is the contractor’s duties to ensure that all
workers are aware about the proper response to fire and other serious emergencies.
One of the most factors affecting safety performance is emergency/disaster
planning and preparation, (Jannadi & Bu-Khamsin, 2002). The emergency can be
brought under control using the resource and procedures for the emergency
response in place for the workplace, (Hislop, 1999).

18
2.5.13. Safety and Health Inspections
Safety and health inspections are a method by which management can become
familiar with the nature of safety and health conditions on sites. Workplace safety
and health inspections by competent persons are useful in terms of reducing work
injuries, (Hinze & Gambatese, 2003). Further, companies who implement safety
and health inspections have fewer accidents than companies that do not perform
inspections, (Reese, 2003). (Hinze & Raboud, 1988), concluded that lower injury
rates were noted on projects that employed safety officers who conducted job site
safety inspections.

2.5.14. Safety and Health Management Meetings

Regular safety and health meetings are essential for communicating safety and
health data to all stakeholders. When the employee is convinced that his employer
is concerned about the workplace safety, the employee will conform to safety and
health guidelines and execute the work in a safe way, (Fang, et al., 2004).
Moreover, the projects that practice sophisticated schedules and those which
included the owner for coordination meetings are having safer performances,
(Hinze & Raboud, 1988).

2.5.15. First-Aid Arrangements

First-aid is a provision of primary care for an injury as it is regularly carried out
by trained first aider to an injured person until definitive medical treatment can be
reached if required. It is essential for each construction site to have the appropriate
first aid arrangements. However, these arrangements would not eliminate the
hazards but only to reduce the potential risk on the injured person which might be
exposed. The first aid arrangements, vary from construction site to another
depending on the size and the workforce of the project. DM set regulation
regarding the certified first aider required for construction site, see (Table 3).
Moreover, it is stated in the regulation the required numbers and contents of the
first aid kit and room, (DM, 2008).

Table 3 - Required number of first aiders

Total Workforce Part time First Aider (but always available at site Full time First Aider
Less than 50 1 0
50 – 250 1 1
250 – 500 2 2
500 – 1000 3 3
A part time and a full time first aider shall be added for each extra 1000 or numerical fraction
of 1000 thereof

19
2.5.16. Welfare Facilities
Work in the construction industry is demanding; it involves much manual or
physical activity. It is also hazardous and dirty. Good welfare facilities not only
improve workers’ welfare but also enhance efficiency. Welfare facilities such as
the provision of drinking-water, washing, sanitary and changing place, restrooms,
smoking areas, first-aid arrangements and assistance in transport from place of
residence to the work site and back, all support to reduce exhaustion and improve
workers’ health. So, the contactor need to arrange for suitable welfare facilities
for his workers’ usages, prior starting the construction activities. Therefore,
decent work-related welfare facilities improve workers’ health and morale and
their efficiency, resulting in enhanced productivity and better work relations,
(ILO, 1995).

2.5.17. Safety Signals, Signs and Barricades

It is essential in all construction sites to have a uniform signalling system to be
understood by all stakeholders to prevent danger. The symbols of signals should
be appeared at suitable spots and also should be available in a safety booklet.
However, it is the contractor responsibility to ensure that all stakeholders are
aware about all signals that they should recognize, (Tam, et al., 2003).

Warnings in the forms of signs and symbols have been recognized as one of the
effective tools to influence behaviour and develop the risk awareness of
stakeholders.

Understanding signs will provide valuable information in refinement the safety

and health management strategies for the construction industry. Safety signs
usually contain four components: signal words, hazard statement, noncompliance
statement and some instructions. Moreover, colour of warning labels should
attract the attention of viewers. Different signal colours characterise different
ranks of risk because of the consequences of cultural effect or physiological
reactions. Usually, red characterises the highest rank of hazard, followed by
orange, yellow, green, blue and white, (Edworthy & Adams, 1996). In addition,
warning labels should have signal words, such as danger, caution and instruction,
to recognise the ranks of hazard. Usually, danger represents the highest rank of
hazard, caution points to an intermediate rank and instruction indicates the lowest
rank, (Chapanis, 1994).

20
The Work at Height Regulations 2005 applies to all work at height where there is
a risk of a fall liable to cause personal injury. The scaffolding need to be checked
prior to being used for the first time, following exposure to weather conditions,
after substantial addition, dismantling or other alteration and at intervals not
exceeding (7) days from the date of last inspection. So it was essential to produce
a special signal system to be recognized by scaffolding users. The Scafftag system
ensures all workers are understanding the current status of the structure. A
Scafftag should be fitted at all ladder access thereby communicating a safety
message to all.

2.5.18. Work environment

Normally, authority guidelines effectively address the work environment and
procedures to ensure a better level of protection. However, it is not just a matter
of meeting minimum standards and codes lay down by authority. It requires
stakeholders to go further and place their own standards and increase the
responsibilities and the involvement of all parties, (Lorent, 1999).

A better working environment can be produced by setting a tide site. Aspects of

a tide site that need to be identified are contain the following: access and traffic
routes, material and storage handling, site offices and services, the construction
plant, production workshops, services and facilities, and the site attachment.
(Mattila, et al., 1994), found that there were direct relation between the quality of
the work environment and the level of safety in construction sites. Further, the
high quality work environment will improve the housekeeping and reduce the
accident frequency rates. Also, it was recognised that poor housekeeping and the
untidy construction sites had the largest contributing factors to accidents, (Site-
Safe, 1999).

2.5.19. Reward and Punishment System (Incentives)

Incentives is one of the factors that motivate workers to perform in an anticipated
manner to safety and health rules on site. It can be viewed a psychological
approach that rewards workers for their adhered routine on site, (Chan, et al.,
2010). Incentives program consists of three (3) main features: monetary, non-
monetary, and disciplinary action. Monetary and non-monetary are forms of
reward which capable to improve safety and health performance as it encourages
workers to monitor their own safety behaviour. However, disciplinary action is a

21
form of punishment to the worker who violates safety instructions on the site. So
the combination of reward and punishment can be considered as a strategy that
teaches safe behaviours among workers on site, (Teo, et al., 2005).

(Lee & Jaafar, 2012), found that incentives are observed as less important in
affecting safety performance on sites and do not necessarily achieve the safety
record anticipated as a person’s expectations and response to incentives may vary.
Safety in fact, is something that should be valued and harnessed, not to be paid
for.

2.5.20. Role of Government and Engineering Societies

The government and the engineering societies should play a key role to apply the
safety and health guidelines by endorsing standards and codes to protect the
workers and properties. These guidelines should be officially obligate the
companies to adhere them with suitable firm fines for non-compliance.
Government shall conduct a periodically site inspection through an experienced
safety engineers and subjecting the contractors to a warning or fine for unsafe
conditions or hazards existing on a workplace. Moreover, the engineering
societies shall help to extend engineering knowledge by developing the awareness
of safety and health issues among engineers, (Fang, et al., 2004).

(Teo, et al., 2005), suggested that safety and health regulations have to be taken
seriously when planning job activities or setting up company policies. Further,
regulation and its implementation do effect on the construction safety and health
to a significant degree.

In developing countries, there are no strong labour unions like industrial countries
have, which own the power to defend on their labours and to enforce contractors
to provide safe working conditions and safety tools to their labours. So, it is
normally labours in developed countries have to obey and accept the company
offer even it is not enough, (Kartam, et al., 2000). In addition, it was found in the
developing countries that labour laws are not strictly enforced as contractors tend
to ignore the basic safety regulations, (Koehn, et al., 1995).

22
3. Chapter III: Methodology

3.1.Introduction
This chapter discusses study procedure and the method used to conduct the study
related to its objectives that has been presented in Chapter-I. The method used in
this study is quantitative. The methodology that was adopted for this study is the
questionnaire survey. The information or data gathered using questionnaires
focus on selected wider range of respondent from construction industry in Dubai.

This chapter describes the methodology that was used in this study. The adopted
methodology to accomplish this study uses the following techniques: review of
literature related to safety and health performance, the information about the study
design, study location, study population, pilot study, questionnaire design, and
statistical data analysis.

3.2.Study Design
The first stage of the study is to identify the aim of this study and to highlight the
problems statements and establishment of clear objectives is also specified within
the study plan. The second phase of the study included a summary of the
comprehensive literature review.

The third phase of the study included a pilot study which was conducted to
assessment of the factors affecting safety and health performance in construction
projects in Dubai. The fourth phase of this study focused on the modification of
the questionnaire, throughout the feedback obtained from the pilot study. The
purpose of the pilot study was to test and prove that the questionnaire contents are
clear to be understood by respondents. So, it was vital to guarantee that all
information received from experts would be valuable in achieving the objectives
of the study.

The fifth phase of the study focused on distributing questionnaire. This

questionnaire was used to collect the required data in order to achieve the
objectives of the study. One Hundred (100) Questionnaires were distributed
targeting the contractors who are classified under first, second, and third
categories in the building works.
23
The sixth phase of this study was the analysis and discussion of the collected data.

The final phase of the study includes the conclusions and recommendations.

3.3.Study Location
This study was conducted in Emirate of Dubai only. The questionnaire were
distributed to cover the geographical locations over Dubai.

3.4.Study Population
This study targeted contractors in various categories of building works. The
targeted contractors are classified under the first, second and third categories in
the various types of works by Dubai Municipality (DM). Contractors that are
registered under the fourth and fifth classes were neglected due to the low practical
and administrative experience of their companies in construction works. The
studied population was the contractor’s companies that have a valid registration
in DM in the building works. Numbers of registered companies from first, second
and third categories are 545 contractors, (DM, 2013). (Table 4) shows the
numbers of registered contracting companies in each category.

Table 4 - Numbers of registered contractors in DM 2013

Category Grade Registered Companies
First Unlimited floors 144
Second Ground+12 floors 127
Third Ground+4 floors 274
Fourth Ground+1 floor 1633
Fifth Without 2149

3.5.Sample Size
This sample size that represents the targeted population was determine from
following equation formula was used by some researchers like (Hassanein &
Hanna, 2008):

𝑛′
𝑛 = 𝑛′ /(1 + 𝑁 )…………..Equation 1

Where; n′ is the sample size from infinite population, which can be calculated
𝑆2
from the following formula: 𝑛′ = 𝑉 2 …………..Equation 2

Where:

n: sample size from finite population.

24
N: Total population (545 contractors)

𝑉: Standard error of sample population equal 0.05 for the confidence level 95
%=1.96.

𝑆: Standard error variance of population elements, where 𝑆 2 = 𝑃(1 − 𝑃);

maximum at 𝑃 = 0.5

The sample size for the contractors’ population can be calculated from the
previous equations as follows:

𝑆2 (0.5)2
𝑛′ = = = 100
𝑉 2 (0.05)2

The size of the sample was calculated by using 𝑛=𝑛′ /(1+𝑛′𝑁)…………..Equation

1, overall then the sample size of companies is 85 companies.

100
𝑛 = 100/(1 + ( ) = 85
545

Based on DM (2013) report, it is shown that. There are (2149) unclassified

companies and (2178) classified companies, out of these (2178) companies there
are (545) companies classified as (1st, 2nd, and 3rd category) work in building
works. These three categories were the target group of this study. The
questionnaires were targeting these categories. Hundred (100) questionnaire were
distributed through email, (43) questionnaire were returned showing (43%)
response rate.

3.6.Pilot Study
It is normal practice that the survey tool should be piloted to measure its validity
and reliability which test the collected data. A pilot study was conducted with
three safety and health managers in a top contracting companies in UAE to test
whether the questions are understandable, easy to answer, unambiguous, cover
most the required questions, etc. Valuable comments were obtained to improve
the quality of the questionnaire. After a refinement, the questionnaires were
distributed to (100) construction specialists in Dubai by emails. After two - weeks
waiting period, (43) feedbacks were received in which (5) feedbacks were
identified as invalid due to incomplete or invariable answers and (38) responses
considered valid. This response rate relatively accepted respect to the unstable
construction industry conditions in Dubai especially after the world financial
25
crises. However, (20) personal visits to different construction sites in Dubai were
conducted to increase the number of respondents of the survey. So the final valid
respondents are (58) which represent (68%) of the total sample population, see
(Table 5).

Table 5 - Classification of sample size

Title Contractors
Number of population 545
Number of distributes questionnaires 100
Number of respondents 43
Number of valid respondents 38
Number of personal interviews 20
Number of total valid respondents 58

3.7.Questionnaire Design
According to the literature review and after interviewing specialists who were
aware with the safety and health performance at various levels, all the information
that could help in attaining the study objectives were collected, reviewed and
formalized to be suitable for the study.

The questionnaire design was composed of two parts see (Appendix A).
Unrequired personal data and repeated questions were avoided. The questionnaire
was delivered with a covering letter which clarified the purpose of the study, the
way of responding, and the security of the information to reassure high response.

Part 1: This part is divided in five section as follow:

Section 1: General information about the company and current project.

Section 2: number of the manpower who concern about safety and health in the
construction site.

Section 3: statistics about accidents and frequent of occurrence.

Section 4: Authority performance.

The purpose of this part to collect data and statistics which to be compared with
the safety and health regulations and to measure the safety and health performance

26
of construction companies and authorities. Which in return will cover the first
objective of the study.

Part 2: This part includes the list of the factors affecting the safety and health
performance in the construction industry. It contains twenty factors represented
in (Table 2) above. For each factor there is a question, for measuring the degree
of impact on safety and health performance in construction project which will
cover second objective. The degree of impact is constructed on a five-point Likert
scale. (Peterson, 1999). These five points are (very high), (high), (average), (low),
and (very low) see (Table 6).

Table 6 - Factors affecting the safety and health performance in construction

projects

Level Very High High Average low Very Low

Scale 5 4 3 2 1

To evaluate the relative ranking of those factors, the results shall transformed to
importance indices based on the formula,

To determine the relative ranking of the factors, these scores were then
transformed to importance indices based on the formula of Relative Importance
Index (RII).

∑ 𝑤 5𝑛5 + 4𝑛4 + 3𝑛3 + 2𝑛2 + 1𝑛1

𝑅𝐼𝐼 = =
𝐴𝑁 5𝑁

Where 𝑤 is the weighting given to each factor by the respondent, ranging from 1
to 5, (𝑛1 = number of respondents for very high, 𝑛2 = number of respondents for
high, 𝑛3 = number of respondents for average, 𝑛4 = number of respondents for
low, 𝑛5 = number of respondents for very low), 𝐴 is the highest weight (i.e. 5 in
the study) and 𝑁 is the total number of samples. The relative importance index
ranges from 0 to 1. Thus, the questions are in a standardized format and sequence.

27
4. Chapter IV: Data Analysis

4.1. Introduction
This chapter analyses the results of collected data of the questionnaire. The
chapter includes the analyses of; the description of company and current project
information; safety and health manpower; accidents causes, outcomes, and
reasons; authority rules and actions; evaluation of factor affecting safety and
health performance; and analysis for agreement of ranking.

4.2. Company and Current Project Information

This section presents the description of the respondents who participated in this
study. The results collected from the questionnaire shows the (58) companies
participated in the study located in Dubai under the authorities of DM, DTMFZA
and TRAKHEES. The following section will describe the characteristics of the
respondents that participated in this survey. These characteristics also include the
companies' categories, experience and size of the companies.

4.2.1. Job Title of Respondents

From result, (31%) from the respondents were Safety Officers / Advisors, (28%)
were Safety and Health Mangers, (24%) were Project Engineers, and (17%) were
Project Managers, see (Figure 3).

Figure 3 - Job titles of respondents

17%
31%
Project Manager
24% Project Engineer
Safety & Health Manager
28%
Safety Officer/ Advisor

28
4.2.2. Contractors Classification
The contractors were classified based on their categories and the govern authority
of their current project in Dubai. The first three categories in building works were
aimed in this study. These three categories are expected to add value for this
study. (Table 7) shows the data related to the participated companies under each
authority.

Table 7 - Classification of participated companies under each authority

Category First Second Third Total
Authority Number % Number % Number % Number %
DM 10 17% 8 14% 6 10% 24 41%
DTMFZA 6 10% 6 10% 4 7% 16 27%
TRAKHEES 8 15% 6 10% 4 7% 18 32%
Total 24 42% 20 34% 14 24% 58 100%

The table shows that the participated companies were (41%) under DM, (27%)
under DTMFZA, and (32%) under TRAKHEES. While total (42%) were first
category (Unlimited), (34%) were second category (G+12), and (24%) were third
category (G+4).

4.2.3. Working Experience of Company

Working experience is measured in the number of years a company has been
working in the construction industry. (88%), of the three categories of the ample
have been practicing the construction business in the local market for more than
10 years. And, (12%) have been working between 4-10 years. This was due to
the consequences of the world financial crises, as most of unexperienced
companies were unable to economically survive. However, (40%) of the first
category companies have international experience. While the second and third
categories have non experience in the international market.

4.2.4. Company Expenditures on Safety and Health

Company expenditures on safety and health are measured against the satisfaction
level (very high, high, average, and low) of the respondents towards their
management reactions of the safety and health issues. The level of satisfaction
was expressed in two perspectives. First perspective is the category of the
surveyed companies. (Table 8) shows that, (46%) of the first category have very
high level and (46%) have high level. While in second category, (60%) have high
level. However, third category have (72%) on average level. It is clear that the

29
respondents’ satisfaction level towards the company expenditures on safety and
health are improve with the higher category.

Table 8 - Relation between the level of satisfaction and the category of the
company
Category First Second Third
Satisfaction Number % Number % Number %
Very High 11 46% 3 15% 0 0%
High 11 46% 12 60% 2 14%
Average 2 8% 5 25% 10 72%
Low 0 0% 0 0% 2 14%

Second perspective is the type of govern authority. (Table 9) indicates that,

(41.7%) of projects under DM have high level, (56.3%) of projects under
DTMFZA have high level, and (44.5%) of projects under TRAKHEES have very
high level.

Table 9 - Relation between the level of satisfaction and the govern authority
Number of Satisfaction Level of Company Expenditures
Authority
Companies Very High High Average Low
DM 24 5 20.8% 10 41.7% 8 33.3% 1 4.2%
DTMFZA 16 1 6.2% 9 56.3% 5 31.3% 1 6.2%
TRAKHEES 18 8 44.5% 6 33.3% 4 22.2% 0 0.0%

(Figure 4) shows the relations between the level of satisfaction and the two
perspectives for illustration.

Figure 4 - Level of satisfaction against company’s category and the govern

authority

Low
Average
Third

High
Very High
Low
Second

Average
High
Very High
Low
Average
First

High
Very High
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

DM DTMFZA TRAKHEES

30
4.2.5. Type of Projects

Majority of the surveyed companies (79%) are currently working in residential

projects. While (21%) are working in commercial projects, see (Table 10).

Table 10 - Type of current projects surveyed

Type of Projects
Authority Number of Projects
Residential Commercial
DM 24 20 34.5% 4 6.9%
DTMFZA 16 14 24.1% 2 3.4%
TRAKHEES 18 12 20.4% 6 10.6%
Total 58 46 79% 12 21%

4.2.6. Total Number of Employees

DM had set minimum number of employees for each category. It shows in

(Figure 5) that the surveyed companies which have more than (200) employees
are (100%) of first category, (65%) of second category, and (14%) of the third
category.

Figure 5 - Total number of employees

100%

65%

43% 43%
35%
14%

FIRST SECOND THIRD

30-100 100-200 >200

4.2.7. Cost of Construction (AED Million)

All the first category companies are working in projects cost more than (100)
Million Dirhams. While (60%) of second categories companies are working in
projects cost (10-100) Million Dirhams. However, (57%) of the third category are
working in project cost (1-10) Million Dirhams, see (Figure 6). Total (52%) of
projects are cost more than (100) Million Dirhams and (29%) of projects are cost
(10-100) Million Dirhams.

31
 Figure 6 - Cost of construction (Million Dirhams)

100%

57% 60%

36%
25%
15% 7%

1-10 10-100 >100

First Second Third

4.2.8. Duration of Construction (Month)

The construction duration is the time required to complete the project in the
construction phase. More than (50%) of the sample from all categories are
executing projects with duration vary from 12 to 24 months. The reason for the
projects to have long construction duration (more than 24 months), is due to the
fact that either the projects are huge (first category projects) or the projects are
delayed (third category projects) or, it can be both. However, when the duration
is relatively short (less than 12 months), this is due to the fact that either the
projects are small (third category projects) or the projects have a tight schedules
(first category projects), see (Figure 7).

Figure 7 - Duration of construction (Month)

14%
25% 25%

50%

58% 55%

36%
17% 20%

FIRST SECOND THIRD

6-12 12-24 >24

32
4.2.9. Respondent – Working Experience (year)

It was observed from the sample that: (58%) of the first category companies, the
respondents have more than 15 years of experience. Further, (35%) of the second
category companies, the respondents have between 10 to 15 years of experience.
Moreover, (36%) of the third category companies, the respondents have between
5 to 10 years of experience. In general, the respondents working experience
percentage are as follow: 1-5 are (12%); 5-10 are (21%); 10-15 are (31%); and
more than 15 are (36%), see (Table 11).

Table 11 - Respondent – Working Experience (year)

Category Number of Respondent - Working Experience (year)
Projects 1-5 5-10 10-15 >15
First 24 0 0% 2 8% 8 34% 14 58%
Second 20 3 15% 5 25% 7 35% 5 25%
Third 14 4 29% 5 36% 3 21% 2 14%
Total 58 7 12% 12 21% 18 31% 21 36%

4.2.10. Total Man-hours Worked

It is the total number of hours which had been worked by all the workers from the
start of the project till the date of counting. This is useful to measure the safety
and health performance of the companies, the accidents frequency rates (AFR)
and safety performance attitude scores (SPAS) can be found when a detailed
accident records are presented along with the total man-hour worked (not study
objective). In addition, this can be used to determine the key performance
indicator (KPI) for organization. It is shown from the sample that (42%) of the
first category companies had more than (1,000,000) worked hours. While (50%)
of the second category companies had worked hours (100,000 – 1,000,000).
However, (43%) of the third category companies had worked hours (10,000 –
100,000), see (Table 12) and (Figure 8) for illustration.

Table 12 - Total man-hours worked

Number of Total Man-hours Worked (hour)
Category
Projects <10,000 10,000 - 100,000 100,000-1,000,000 >1,000,000
First 24 0 0% 2 8% 12 50% 10 42%
Second 20 3 15% 4 20% 10 50% 3 15%
Third 14 4 29% 6 43% 3 21% 1 7%
Total 58 7 12% 12 21% 25 43% 14 24%

33
 Figure 8 - Total man-hours worked

43% 50%
50%
29%
42%

21%
20%
15%
15%
7%
8%

Third
Second
First

First Second Third

4.3. Safety and Health Manpower

All who are concern about safety and health issues on construction projects either
from the management or workers are having responsibilities and duties which to
be performed. It is vary from company to another or authority to other, the number
and the category of the certified safety persons required, but still the aim is the
same.

4.3.1. Safety and Health Administration Staff

Recently, DM, DMTFZA, and TRAKHEES had set rules for the minimum
required persons who are only monitor and implement the best safety and health
practice on construction sites. The numbers and designations are vary according
to the project size. The surveyed sample shows that (41%) of the sample have
safety and health managers where first category includes (75%) out of that.
However, (90%) have at least one safety advisor or officer and, (72%) have safety
inspectors, see (Table 13). The distribution of safety and health administration
staff is further illustrated in (Figure 9).

34
 Table 13 - Distribution of safety and health administration staff
Number Safety and Health Administration Staff
Category Authority of S&H Safety Advisor / Safety
Projects Manager Officer Inspector
DM 10 7 70% 10 100% 10 100%
DTMFZA 6 4 67% 6 100% 6 100%
First
TRAKHEES 8 6 75% 8 100% 8 100%
Total 24 17 71% 24 100% 24 100%
DM 8 2 25% 7 88% 4 50%
DTMFZA 6 1 17% 5 83% 3 50%
Second
TRAKHEES 6 3 50% 6 100% 5 83%
Total 20 6 30% 18 90% 12 60%
DM 6 0 0% 4 67% 1 17%
DTMFZA 4 0 0% 2 50% 2 50%
Third
TRAKHEES 4 1 25% 4 100% 3 75%
Total 14 1 7% 10 71% 6 43%
DM 24 9 38% 21 88% 15 63%
Total DTMFZA 16 5 31% 13 81% 11 69%
TRAKHEES 18 10 56% 18 100% 16 89%
Grand Total 58 24 41% 52 90% 42 72%

Figure 9 - Distribution of safety and health administration staff

S&H Manager Safety Advisor / Officer Safety Inspector

100% 100% 100%

100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
83%
88%
83% 75%

75% 67%
70% 67% 50% 50% 50%
50%
50%

17%
25% 25%
17%

0% 0%
DM

DM

DM
DTMFZA

DTMFZA

DTMFZA
TRAKHEES

TRAKHEES

TRAKHEES

First Second Third

35
4.3.2. Certified Safety and Health Persons at workplace
It is obvious from the surveyed sample that authorities had made a great efforts to
improve the safety and health in construction sites in the past few years. (Table
14) shows that (100%) of sample have certified first aiders. However, (28%) only
have male nurses which are more likely to be in the first category companies,
because male nurses required in the huge size projects which having massive
numbers of workers. Further, (100%) of the sample who are working under
TRAKHESS have certified scaffolders with total (78%) in all Dubai.

Table 14 - (A) Distribution of certified safety and health persons at workplace

Number of Certified Safety and Health Persons at workplace
Category Authority
Projects First Aider Male Nurse Scaffolders
DM 10 10 100% 6 60% 10 100%
DTMFZA 6 6 100% 3 50% 6 100%
First
TRAKHEES 8 8 100% 5 63% 8 100%
Total 24 24 100% 14 58% 24 100%
DM 8 8 100% 1 13% 5 63%
DTMFZA 6 6 100% 0 0% 3 50%
Second
TRAKHEES 6 6 100% 1 17% 6 100%
Total 20 20 100% 2 10% 14 70%
DM 6 6 100% 0 0% 1 17%
DTMFZA 4 4 100% 0 0% 2 50%
Third
TRAKHEES 4 4 100% 0 0% 4 100%
Total 14 14 100% 0 0% 7 50%
DM 24 24 100% 7 29% 16 67%
Total DTMFZA 16 16 100% 3 19% 11 69%
TRAKHEES 18 18 100% 6 33% 18 100%
Grand Total 58 58 100% 16 28% 45 78%

In addition, (66%) of the sample have certified scaffolding supervisors, most of

them (94%) are under TRAKHEES projects and (100%) of them are from the first
category companies. Certified operators have very high percentage (97%) in the
construction industry due to the enforcement of the law. Also, (81%) of the
sample have certified fire marshals and again the projects under TRAKHEES have
the biggest share (100%), see (Table 15). The Distribution of certified safety and
health persons at workplace are shown in (Figure 10), shows that TRAKHEES
has the highest rates on all categories followed by DM on first and second
categories but DTMFZA comes to the second stage on third category.

36
 Table 15 - (B) Distribution of certified safety and health persons at workplace
Certified Safety and Health Persons at workplace
Number of
Category Authority Scaffolding
Projects Operator Fire Marshal
Supervisor
DM 10 10 100% 10 100% 10 100%
DTMFZA 6 6 100% 6 100% 6 100%
First
TRAKHEES 8 8 100% 8 100% 8 100%
Total 24 24 100% 24 100% 24 100%
DM 8 3 38% 8 100% 6 75%
DTMFZA 6 2 33% 6 100% 4 67%
Second
TRAKHEES 6 6 100% 6 100% 6 100%
Total 20 11 55% 20 100% 16 80%
DM 6 0 0% 5 83% 1 17%
DTMFZA 4 0 0% 3 75% 2 50%
Third
TRAKHEES 4 3 75% 4 100% 4 100%
Total 14 3 21% 12 86% 7 50%
DM 24 13 54% 23 96% 17 71%
Total DTMFZA 16 8 50% 15 94% 12 75%
TRAKHEES 18 17 94% 18 100% 18 100%
Grand Total 58 38 66% 56 97% 47 81%

Figure 10 - Distribution of certified safety and health persons at workplace

Fire Marshal
100% 100%
100%
Operator
100%
Scaffolding Supervisor
Scaffolder 100%
100% 100%
100%
Male Nurse
100%
75% First Aider
67% 100%
100% 100%
100% 50%

100% 100%
100% 75% 75%
17%
100% 100%
100% 38%
100% 83% 50%
33%
63% 100%
60% 50% 63% 50% 17% 50%
13% 17% 17%

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

DTMFZA

DTMFZA

DTMFZA
DM

DM

DM
TRAKHEES

TRAKHEES

TRAKHEES

FIRST SECOND THIRD

37
4.4. Accidents Causes, Outcomes and Reasons
4.4.1. History of Fatality Accidents

Perhaps the worst nightmare for construction companies is the fatality accidents
due to the consequences of outcomes of such accidents. It was observed from the
surveyed companies, that even high category companies have better safety and
health performance but, also have the highest rates of fatalities. This is obviously
due to the massive manpower involved in first category’s projects. Around (40%)
of the sample had fatality accidents during the last (8) years, see (Table 16). First
category companies had (52%) of the total fatality accidents followed by second
category (31%), for the mentioned period, see (Figure 11).

Table 16 - Number of fatality during work from 2005 to 2012

Number of Number of Fatality During Work (last 8 years)
Category
Projects 0 1-5 6-10 >10
First 24 12 50% 9 38% 2 8% 1 4%
Second 20 13 65% 5 25% 2 10% 0 0%
Third 14 10 72% 3 21% 1 7% 0 0%
Total 58 35 60% 17 29% 5 9% 1 2%

Figure 11 - Distribution of fatality accidents among companies

17%
52%
31%

First Second Third

Further, (Table 17) shows that (52%) of fatality accidents were occurred from
2005 to 2006, and (30%) from 2007 to 2008 (the booming period). However, only
(9%) of fatality accidents were occurred in following periods (world financial
crises). Moreover, main contractor workers has (65%), while sub-contractors had
(35%) of the fatality accidents, see (Table 18).

Table 17 - Year of fatality during work

Number of Year of Fatality During Work (last 8 years)
Category
Fatality 2005-2006 2007-2008 2009-2010 2011-2012
First 12 8 67% 3 25% 0 0% 1 8%
Second 7 3 43% 2 29% 1 14% 1 14%
Third 4 1 25% 2 50% 1 25% 0 0%
Total 23 12 52% 7 30% 2 9% 2 9%

38
 Table 18 - Fatality category
Fatality Category
Number of
Category Main
Fatality Sub-Contractor Staff Public
Contractor
First 12 9 75% 2 17% 1 8% 0 0%
Second 7 4 57% 3 43% 0 0% 0 0%
Third 4 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 0 0%
Total 23 15 65% 7 30% 1 4% 0 0%

4.4.2. Cause of Injury

When the respondents were asked to rate each cause of injury that crew
experienced in construction sites (high, average, low, and none), it was found that
falls had (16%) of high rate. While, struck by object had (19%) and slips & trips
had (24%) of average rates, see (Table 19 & Figure 12).

Table 19 - Cause of injury in construction sites - rates

Rate High Average Low None
Falls 9 16% 13 22% 20 34% 16 28%
Cause of Injury

Struck by object 4 7% 11 19% 19 33% 24 41%

A collapse 2 3% 0 0% 12 21% 44 76%
Electrocution 0 0% 2 3% 6 10% 50 86%
Slips & trips 7 12% 14 24% 19 33% 18 31%
Defective /misuse Equipment 5 9% 9 16% 16 28% 28 48%
Heat Stress 1 2% 2 3% 3 5% 52 90%

Figure 12 - Cause of injury in construction sites - rates

28% 31%
41% 48%
76%
34% 86% 90%
33%
33%
28%
22% 24%
19% 21% 16%
16% 10% 12% 5% 3%
7% 3% 3% 9%
2%

Hight Average Low Never

39
4.4.3. Treatment Outcome Details

There are four type of treatment outcomes when the accident occurs. First, fatality
which is death due to work related injury or illness. Second, medical treatment
case (MTC) when the injured or sick person requires treatment from professional
not first aider. Third, lost time injury (LTI) when the injured or sick person cannot
perform his work the day after the accident. Last, first aid case (FAC) which is a
work related minor injury or illness which can be treated by a first aider and the
work can be proceeded, (OGP, 1999). It was found that (100%) of the respondents
agree that they don’t have fatality as outcome of accidents even there were
recordable fatality accidents during the last (8) years. However, (53%) had rated
FAC as the highest treatment outcome in case of accidents. The distribution of
the respondents rates are indicated in (Table 20 & Figure 13).

Table 20 - Rate of treatment outcome details

Rate High Average Low None
Fatality 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 58 100%
Treatment
Outcome
Details

Medical Treatment Case 0 0% 3 5% 8 14% 47 81%

Lost time Injury 1 2% 8 13% 15 26% 34 59%
First Aid Case 31 53% 19 33% 8 14% 0 0%

Figure 13 - Rate of treatment outcome details

53% 33% 14%

2%
13% 26% 59%

5% 14% 81%

100%

Hight Average Low Never

40
4.4.4. Causal Factors Causing Accidents

After analyzing the questionnaire, it was found the rate of the casual factors
causing accidents (lack of training, poor supervision, unsafe conditions, and
unsafe act) are vary among companies. However, poor supervision had significant
total rate (97%) of the reasons causing accidents followed by lack of training
(90%) then unsafe act due to negligence of regulation (65%) which are illustrated
in (Table 1 & Figure 14).

Table 21 - Rate of the causal factors causing accidents

Rate High Average Low None Total
Lack of
14 25% 18 31% 20 34% 6 10% 90%
Causal Factors

Training
Accidents
Causing

Poor
Supervision 22 38% 18 31% 16 28% 2 3% 97%
Unsafe
Conditions 8 14% 7 12% 14 24% 29 50% 50%
Unsafe Act 13 22% 11 19% 14 24% 20 35% 65%

Figure 14 - Rate of the causal factors causing accidents

UNSAFE ACT 22% 19% 24%

35%

UNSAFE CONDITIONS 14% 12% 24%

50%

POOR SUPERVISION 38%

31%
28% 3%
LACK OF TRAINING 25%
31%
34%
10%

High Average Low None

4.5. Authority Rules and Actions

Authority plays very important role in implementing safety and health regulations
especially in the developing countries as illustrated in the literature. The actions
which should be taken by authority as follow:

41
4.5.1. Safety and Health Inspection by Authority
It was found from the survey that (41%) of the respondents agreed on the low rate
of the authority safety and health inspection, while (33%) found it very low,
see(Table 22). By questioning some respondents about the reason of that low rate
of inspection, it was due to the world financial crises in 2008 as government
perhaps was looking for cut down the expenses as before the crises there was
regular monthly inspections by the authority. The lowest rate was by third
category companies which had up to (75%), see (Figure 15) for more illustration.

Table 22 - Rate of safety and health inspection by authority

Authority Safety and Health Inspection
Number
Category Authority Very
of Projects High Average Low
Low
DM 10 2 20% 3 30% 4 40% 1 10%
DTMFZA 6 1 17% 3 50% 0 0% 2 33%
First
TRAKHEES 8 1 13% 2 25% 3 38% 2 25%
Total 24 4 17% 8 33% 7 29% 5 21%
DM 8 0 0% 2 25% 5 63% 1 13%
DTMFZA 6 0 0% 1 17% 4 67% 1 17%
Second
TRAKHEES 6 0 0% 0 0% 2 33% 4 67%
Total 20 0 0% 3 15% 11 55% 6 30%
DM 6 0 0% 0 0% 4 67% 2 33%
DTMFZA 4 0 0% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75%
Third
TRAKHEES 4 0 0% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75%
Total 14 0 0% 0 0% 6 43% 8 57%
DM 24 2 8% 5 21% 13 54% 4 17%
Total DTMFZA 16 1 6% 4 25% 5 31% 6 38%
TRAKHEES 18 1 6% 2 11% 6 33% 9 50%
Grand Total 58 4 7% 11 19% 24 41% 19 33%

Figure 15 - Rate of safety and health inspection by authority

High Average Low Very Low

10% 13% 17%

25%
33% 33%
40% 67%
75% 75%
38% 63%
67%
50%
30% 67%
25%
33%
20% 25% 25% 25%
17% 13% 17%
DTMFZA

DTMFZA

DTMFZA
DM

DM

DM

TRAKHEES
TRAKHEES

TRAKHEES

FIRST SECOND T HIRD

42
4.5.2. Safety and Health Certificates to Work by Authority
Sometimes it is required to obtain approval by the authority to start some activities
at the work place. Procedures are varies depending on the project size and under
which authority the project is located. (Figure 16), shows that most of the projects
under DM (91.7%) have not obtain any safety and health approvals before
commencement of the activities as the DM has no regulation about the mentioned
and as long the contractors obtained the building permit, they can commence with
the work. Further, (75%) of respondents stated that it is not required by DTMFZA
to obtain any approvals from authority regarding safety and health issues.
However, (94.4%) of the respondents assure it is a must to obtain certificate of
conformity (COC) from TRAKHEES in different stages of the construction even
in the work at night. The different COC forms are shown in (

43
 Appendix B).

Figure 16 - Authority performance regarding issuing safety and health

certificates

Never Sometimes Every time

91.7% 94.4%
75.0%

25.0%
8.3% 5.6%

DM DTMFZA TRAKHEES

In general, (59%) of the respondents confirmed that there is no safety and health
certificates required by the authority to start work while, (29%) assure it is
mandatory, see (Figure 17).

Figure 17 - Safety and health certificates issued by all authorities

29%
59%
12%

Never Sometimes Every time

4.6. Evaluation of Factors Affecting the Safety and Health Performance

Part (2) of the questionnaire includes the list of factors affecting safety and health
performance in the construction industry. It contains twenty factors which had
been discussed in the literature review. The details of the questionnaire replay
and the calculated RII for each category are shown in (Appendix C).

The RII was calculated for each category separately and rank was given according
to the RII results, then the total RII and Rank of all samples was established in
(Table 23). It can be found from the results that the most factors affecting the
safety and health performance in construction industry in Dubai are:

44
 In first category companies, work environment (RII=0.90) comes in the first rank
then safety and health policy, risk assessment and safety and health inspection
(RII=0.89) comes next and followed by PPE (RII=0.88) and so on. While in
second category companies, project cost and duration (RII=0.89) comes in the first
rank then work environment (RII=0.88) comes next and followed by safety
signals, signs and barricades and role of government and engineering societies
(RII=0.87) and so on. Further, for the third category companies, PPE (RII=0.90)
comes in the first rank then project duration and safety signals, signs and
barricades (RII=0.89) comes next and followed by project cost and work
environment (RII=0.87) and so on.

It can be noticed the RII and rank of the factors are varies among companies and
categories. By calculating the RII for all categories together, the final rank for the
factors affecting safety and health performance (Table 23) shows the most factors
respectively are: Work environment (RII=0.89), Safety signals, signs and
barricades (RII=0.88), Project cost (RII=0.88), Role of government and
engineering societies (RII=0.87), and PPE (RII=0.87), etc… And the least factors
respectively are: Weather condition (RII=0.58), Type of owner (RII=0.63),
Reward and punishment system (RII=0.64), Complexity of the design (RII=0.68),
and Safety and health management meetings (RII=070), etc...

Table 23 - RII and ranking of safety and health performance factors

First Second Third Total
Factors Affecting the Safety and
S.N RII Rank RII Rank RII Rank RII Rank
Health Performance
1 Complexity of the Design 0.66 17 0.72 16 0.64 16 0.68 17
2 Type of Owner / Main Developer 0.60 19 0.58 19 0.77 8 0.63 19
3 Weather Condition 0.52 20 0.60 18 0.66 11 0.58 20
4 Project Cost 0.87 9 0.89 1 0.87 4 0.88 3
5 Project Duration 0.82 13 0.89 2 0.89 2 0.86 6
6 Safety and Health Policy 0.89 2 0.86 6 0.66 12 0.82 9
Accidents / Incidents / Near Miss
7 0.88 8 0.82 9 0.61 18 0.79 11
Report
8 Evacuation Plan / Fire drill 0.84 12 0.73 15 0.53 20 0.73 14
9 Risk Assessment 0.89 3 0.83 8 0.60 19 0.80 10
10 Safety and Health Training 0.86 10 0.84 7 0.83 7 0.84 7

45
 Personal Protective Equipment
11 0.88 5 0.82 10 0.90 1 0.87 5
(PPE)
Emergency Planning and
12 0.78 14 0.76 13 0.66 13 0.74 12
Procedures
13 Safety and Health Inspection 0.89 4 0.82 11 0.74 9 0.83 8
Safety and Health Management
14 0.86 11 0.55 20 0.66 14 0.70 16
Meetings
15 First Aid Arrangements 0.73 16 0.75 14 0.66 15 0.72 15
16 Welfare Facilities 0.76 15 0.77 12 0.67 10 0.74 13
Safety Signals, Signs and
17 0.88 6 0.87 4 0.89 3 0.88 2
Barricades
18 Work Environment (tide site ) 0.90 1 0.88 3 0.87 5 0.89 1
Reward and Punishment System
19 0.64 18 0.64 17 0.63 17 0.64 18
(Incentives)
Role of Government and
20 0.88 7 0.87 5 0.86 6 0.87 4
Engineering Societies
Total 0.80 0.77 0.73 0.77

4.7. Analysis for Agreement of Ranking

As shown in (Table 23), each category of contractors considered many factors as
important factors and agreed on the importance of some of those factors, and
disagreed with respect to some other factors. The agreement on ranking for the
three categories was tested by using the Kendall concordance analysis. The
Kendall coefficient of concordance (W) is a statistic, which can be decent measure
to identify how practical an agreement among arrangements of rankings. The
Kendall coefficient of concordance (W) varies between 0 and 1 regardless of the
number of sets of rankings. A coefficient of (W=1) indicates a perfect agreement
and coefficient of (W=0) indicates no agreement or association. Kendall
coefficient of concordance was calculated according to (Kaming, et al., 1996) and
was found to be 0.688, see (Appendix D) for detailed calculations. This indicates
that there is agreement among the ranks of these three categories companies.

5. Chapter V: Conclusions and Recommendations

5.1. Summary of the Study

The sample size was fifty-eight (58) of different construction companies from
Dubai who are participated in this study. A questionnaire survey was conducted
for this study which is divided into two parts. The first part, is to evaluate the
safety and health performance for the first, second, and third categories of
construction companies working under DM, DTMFZA, and TRAKHEES in

46
 Dubai. The second part, is to find the factors affecting the construction safety and
health performance of each category under each authority. A literature review
was conducted and identified twenty factors which affecting the safety and health
performance in construction sites. The degree of impact of these factors on safety
and health performance were evaluated based on a five point Likert scale. The
collected data were evaluated and the RII of each factor was found, consequently
these factors were ranked and tested for agreement. The ranks were varied among
each category and total ranks were established for these factors. The results of
this study could be used by construction companies and authorities to identify the
level of remedial efforts which need to be applied to enhance the construction
safety and health performance.

5.2. Conclusions
The main conclusions of the results are:

 (59%) of the respondents were from the safety departments of the companies,
which grantee that those companies have a professional safety department. While
the rest of respondents (41%) were not from the safety department but that not
mean that are not have safety departments.
 The distribution of the respondents were relatively close among different
categories and govern authorities which can reduce the risk of wrong answers of
the study. The majority of companies (88%) have more than (10) years of
experience in the local market which made them familiar with safety and health
regulations of the country.
 The respondents’ satisfaction level towards the company expenditures on safety
and health are higher in the first category companies followed by second category
and then by third category. However, the projects under TRAKHEES have the
highest level of the respondents’ satisfaction towards the company expenditures
on safety and health. This mean that, the authority enforces the construction
companies to implement some safety and health procedures for their projects
which might be costly.
 Majority of the sample (79%), are currently working in residential projects. And,
(52%) of projects are cost more than (100) Million Dirhams. Also, (22%) of
projects have less than 12 months of construction duration. Further, (24%) had
more than 100,000,000 of total man-hours worked which indicate the massive
manpower are working in such projects.

47
 All surveyed companies have at least one person who is responsible for
monitoring and implementing safety and health best practice as per regulations.
However, TRAKHEES are fully implement the need of certified safety and health
persons at the workplace for all construction categories which is not the same by
DM or DTMFZA.
 Falls is the most cause of injury followed by slips and trips then struck by an
object. However, the majority of treated injuries are categorised under first aid
cases. Further, the majority of respondents agreed on the poor supervision is the
main reason which is responsible for the accident occurrence, followed by lack of
training then unsafe act.
 The majority of respondents agreed on the safety and health inspection by
authority is low to very low. Further, TRAKHEES had the lowest rate of safety
and health inspection. However, TRAKHEES is the only authority who issue
safety and health certificates in different stages during the construction works.
 The ranking of the factors affecting safety and health performance are varied
among companies and categories. It can be noticed that safety and health policy
had the second ranking position in the companies of first category, but sixth and
twelfth ranking positions for the companies of second and third categories
respectively. Which indicates that safety and health policy is well understandable
and recognizable by the companies of first category and almost had limit usage by
second and third categories. Further, risk assessment had the third ranking
position in the companies of first category, but eighth and nineteenth ranking
positions for the second and third categories respectively. Which means that risk
assessment is essential to maintain the safety and health performance in first
category and almost had a limit practice by second and third categories. In
addition, safety and health inspection had the fourth ranking position in the first
category, but eleventh and ninth ranking positions for the second and third
categories respectively. Which shows that safety and health inspection for the
work place is vital to improve the safety and health performance in first category
and had less practice in second and third categories. In spite of project cost and
duration had a significant ranking in the second and third categories, but it had
less consideration by the first category.
 In general, the companies of first category have the best awareness of safety and
health best practice than the other categories which is assured by many

48
 researchers. Moreover, TRAKHEES have the best implementation of safety and
health regulations.

5.3. Recommendations
Based on the conclusions, and the results found from this study, the subsequent
points can be recommended:

 As the poor supervision is the main reason which is responsible for the accident
occurrence, the construction companies need to increase the quality and quantity
of safety and health supervisors.
 More efforts need to be done by the construction companies and the different
authorities to improve awareness and the training for the workforces. In addition,
an adequate budget for safety and health provision should be stated in all
construction contracts which should be approved by all parties and to monitor the
spent of the budget.
 Safety and health policy and risk assessment are very important issues need to be
addressed properly to the companies of second and third categories, and to be well
understandable of their importance as first category companies do. Further, the
efficiency of site safety and health inspections need to be increased by using a
more qualified person, especially in the companies of second and third categories.
 Regular safety and health inspections need to be conducted by the authority’s
competent person to monitor the performance of safety and health at workplaces,
and to notify the construction companies about any violations need to be rectified
or noncompliance of regulations. Further, DM and DTMFZA shall follow the
same procedures of TRAKHEES regarding issuing safety and health certificates
in different stages of construction works. Moreover, the safety and health
performance history of the construction companies should be considered within
the classification of the companies by authority.
 The quantitative appraisal of safety and health performance should be applied for
construction companies to permit comparing different companies performances.

5.4. Future work

 Research can be conducted to measure the accidents frequency rates (AFR) and
safety performance attitude scores (SPAS).

49
 Research can be extended to include other Emirates like Abu Dhabi, and Sharjah
to check the safety and health performance for construction companies. Further
extent can identify the regulations and performance among authorities.
 Research can be conducted to compare the construction safety and health
performance with other industries like manufacture and agriculture industries.
 Research can be conducted to realize the role of the owners and the consultants to
avoid or mitigate the accidents in construction sites.
 Research can be carried out to evaluate the cost of safety and to compare this cost
with the cost of accidents to inspire the construction companies to take safety and
health issues seriously.
 Research can be carried out for fourth and fifth categories of companies. Also
such research can be conducted to find the factors affecting the safety and health
performance of specialty contractors such as demolishing contractors, shoring
contractors, or excavation contractors.

50
References

Agwu, M., 2012. The Effects of Risk Assessment (Hirarc) on Organisational

Performance in Selected Construction Companies in Nigeria. British Journal of
Economics, Management & Trade, 2(3), pp. 212-224.

Alberta, G. o., 2011. Occupational Injuries and Diseases in Alberta. [Online]

Available at: http://humanservices.alberta.ca/documents/OID-construction-
industries.pdf
[Accessed 10 June 2013].

Al-Humaidi, H. & Tan, F., 2010. Construction Safety in Kuwait. Journal of

Performance of Constructed Facilities , 24(1), pp. 70-77.

Al-Kaabi, N. & Hadipriono, F., 2003. Construction safety performance in the United
Arab Emirates. Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems, 20(3), pp. 197-212.

Alleyne, G., 1997. Global Health the Paradigm. Policy and Program Implications.
Washington, D.C.: Pan American Health Organization.

Al-Tabtabai, H., 2002. Analyzing Construction Site Accidents in Kuwait. Kuwait J. Sci.
Eng, 29(2), pp. 213-238.

Baloi, D. & Price, F., 2003, Vol. 21, pp. 261. Modelling global risk factors affecting
construction cost performance. International Journal of Project Management, 21(4), pp.
261-269.

BLS, 2012. Bureau of Labor Statistics - U.S. Department of Labor - News Release.
NATIONAL CENSUS OF FATAL OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES IN
2011(PRELIMINARY RESULTS), 20 September, pp. 1-13.

Brake, D. & Bates, G., 2002. Deep Body Core Temperatures in Industrial Workers
Under Thermal Stress. JOEM, 44(2), pp. 125-135.

Chan, D., Chan, A. & Choi, T., 2010. An empirical survey of the benefits of
implementing pay for safety scheme (PFSS) in the Hong Kong construction industry.
Journal of Safety Research, 41(5), pp. 433-443.

Chapanis, A., 1994. Hazard Associated with Three Signal Words and Four Colors on
Warning Signs. Ergonomics, 37(2), p. 265–275.
51
Chapman, C. & Ward, S., 2004. Why risk efficiency is a key aspect of best practice
projects. International Journal of Project Management, 22(8), 22(8), p. 619–632.

Chua, D. & Goh, Y., 2004. Incident causation model for improving feedback of safety
knowledge. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 130(4), p. 542–551.

Colling, D., 1990. Industrial Safety: Management and Technology. 1st ed. Englewood
Cliffs, N.J: Prentice Hall College Div.

DEC, 2013. Dubai Economic Outlook Q3-2012. [Online]

Available at: http://www.dec.org.ae/reports-publications/details.aspx?id=111
[Accessed 6 June 2013].

DM, 2013. Dubai Municipality: Contracting companies and engineering offices data.
[Online]
Available at:
http://www.dm.gov.ae/wps/portal/DepartmentHomePageEn?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTE
XT=/wps/wcm/connect/DMContentEn/Home/Common/contractingcompaniesengineeri
ngofficesdata
[Accessed 09 June 2013].

DM, D. M., 2008. Code of Constructions Safety Practice. Dubai: Government of Dubai.

DSC, 2013. Statistical Year Book. [Online]

Available at:
http://www.dsc.gov.ae/EN/Publications/Pages/PublicationsList.aspx?PublicationId=1
[Accessed 5 May 2013].

DTMFZA, D. T. a. M. F. Z. A., 2008. health, Safety and Environment Regulations. 2nd

ed. Dubai: Government of Dubai.

Edworthy, J. & Adams, A., 1996. Warning Design: A Research Prospective. London:
Taylor & Francis.

EHS, E. H. a. S., 2010. Construction Safety Regulations. 4th ed. Duabi: Government of
Dubai.

ElSafty, A., ElSafty, A. & Malek, M., 2012. Construction Safety and Occupational
Health Education in Egypt, the EU, and US Firms. Open Journal of Civil Engineering,
Volume 2, pp. 174-182.

52
Eurostat, 2012. Health and safety at work statistics. [Online]
Available at:
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Health_and_safety_at_w
ork_statistics
[Accessed 25 June 2013].

Fang, D., Huang, X. & Hinze, J., 2004. Benchmarking Studies on Construction Safety
Management in China. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 130(3),
pp. 424-432.

Flanagan, R. & Norman, G., 1993. Risk Management and construction. Oxford:
Blackwell Scientific Publications.

Fung, I., Tam, C., Tung, K. & Man, A., 2005. Safety cultural divergences among
management, supervisory and worker groups in Hong Kong construction industry.
International Journal of Project Management, 23(7), p. 504–512.

Ghaemi, H., 2009. Human Rights Watch , November 2006. In: Building Towers,
Cheating Workers in the United Arab Emirates. s.l.:Middle East and North Africa
Division of Human Rights Watch, pp. 34-35.

GOSI, 2011. General Organization for Social Insurance - Annual statistical report
1433 H. [Online]
Available at: http://www.gosi.gov.sa/portal/web/guest/statistics/view-
statistic?StatisticsId=423367
[Accessed 2013 June 25].

Guidotti, T. L., 2011. Global Occupational Health. 1st ed. New York: Oxford
University Press.

GulfNews, 2006. Dubai has 30,000 construction cranes. [Online]

Available at: http://gulfnews.com/business/construction/dubai-has-30-000-construction-
cranes-1.241346
[Accessed 16 June 2013].

Hammer, W. & Price, D., 2000. Occupational Safety Management and Engineering. 5th
ed. s.l.:Prentice Hall.

Hassanein, A. & Hanna, R., 2008. Safety Performance in the Egyptian construction
Industry. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(6), p. 451–455.
53
Hinze, J., 1997. Construction Safety. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Hinze, J. & Gambatese, J., 2003. Factors that Influence Safety Performance of Specialty
Contractors. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 129(2), pp. 159-
164.

Hinze, J. & Harrison, C., 1981. Safety programs in large construction firms. Journal of
the Construction Division, 107(3), pp. 455-467.

Hinze, J. & Raboud, P., 1988. Safety on large building construction projects. Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, 114(2), pp. 286-293.

Hinze, J. & Wiegand, F., 1992. Role of Designers in Construction Worker Safety.
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 118(4), pp. 677-684.

Hislop, R., 1999. Construction Site Safety – A guide for managing contractors. Florida:
Lewis Pubilishers, Boca Raton.

HRW, 2012. The Island of Happiness Revisited, United States of America: Human
Rights Watch.

HSE, H. a. S. E. -., 2013. Construction - Work related injuries and ill health. [Online]
Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/industry/construction/construction.pdf
[Accessed 24 June 2013].

ILO, I. L. O., 1995. Safety, Health and Welfare on Construction Sites: A Training
Manual. Geneva: International Labour Office.

Jannadi, O. & Bu-Khamsin, M., 2002. Safety factors considered by industrial

contractors in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management ,
37(5), pp. 539-547.

Kaming, F. et al., 1996. Project Managers’ Perception of Production Problems: An

Indonesian Case Study. Building Research and Information, 24(5), pp. 302-310.

Kartam, N., Flood, I. & Koushki, P., 2000. Construction safety in Kuwait: issues,
procedures, problems, and recommendations. Safety Science, 36(3), p. 163–184.

Kenrick, V., 2012. PPE and Construction Safty in the Middle East. [Online]
Available at: http://ehstoday.com/ppe/construction-safety-in-the-middle-east-0131
[Accessed May 5 2013].

54
Kines, P., Spangenberg, S. & Dyreborg, J., 2007. Prioritizing occupational injury
prevention in the construction industry: Injury severity or absence?. Journal of Safety
Research, 38(1), pp. 53-58.

Klein, J., 2009. Two Centuries of Process Safety at DuPont. Process Safety Progress,
28(2), p. 114–122.

Koehn, E., Kothari, R. & Pan, C., 1995. Safety in Developing Countries: Professional
and Bureaucratic Problems. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,
121(3), pp. 261-265.

Koehn, E., Kothari, R. & Pan, C., 1995. Safety in Developing Countries: Professional
and Bureaucratic Problems. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,
121(3), pp. 261-265.

Lee, C. & Jaafar, Y., 2012. Prioritization of Factors Influencing Safety Performance on
Construction Sites: A Study Based on Grade Seven (G7)Main Contractors’
Perspectives. IPEDR, 57(2), pp. 6-12.

Levitt, R. & Samelson, N., 1993. Construction Safety Management. 2nd ed. New York:
John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Lorent, P., 1999. Construction Safety Coordination in Belgium and Luxembourg. In: A.
Gottfried, L. Trani & L. Dias, eds. Safety Coordination and Quality in Construction.
Milan, Italy: Proceedings of International Conference of CIB Working Commission 99
and Task Group 36, pp. 7-26.

Mattila, M., Hyttinen, M. & Rantanen, E., 1994. Effective Supervisory Behavior and
Safety at the Building Site. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 13(2), pp.
85-93.

Ministry of labour, U. M., 2001. Legal Affairs - new labour law. [Online]
Available at:
http://www.mol.gov.ae/newcontrolpanel2010/Attachments/21062012/labour%20law%2
0no.8%20year%201980.pdf
[Accessed 06 July 2013].

Mwombeki, F., 2005. Occupational Health & Safety Challenges in Construction Sites in
Tanzania. Rethinking and Revitalizing Construction Safety, Health, Environment and
Quality, CIB138(1), pp. 778 -789.
55
Neitzel, R., Seixas, N. & Ren, K., 2001. A Review of Crane Safety in the Construction
Industry. Applied Occupational and Environmenta l Hygiene, 16(12), p. 1106–1117.

OGP, 1999. Glossary of HSE terms. [Online]

Available at: http://www.ogp.org.uk/pubs/244.pdf
[Accessed 5 5 2013].

OSHA, O. S. a. H. A., 2013. Heat Fatalities. [Online]

Available at: https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/heatillness/map_text.html
[Accessed 09 July 2013].

Petersen, D., 1971. Techniques of safety management. New York : McGraw-Hill.

Peterson, R., 1999. Constructing Effective Questionnaires. s.l.:SAGE Publications, Inc.

Porteous, W., 1999. Characteristics of the Building Industry and its Clients. s.l.:s.n.

Reese, C., 2003. Occupational Heath and Safety Management: A Practical Approach.
1st ed. s.l.:CRC Press.

Report-A-3, 1982. Improving Construction Safety Performance. [Online]

Available at: http://constructionsafetyconsultant.com/articles/report_a_3.pdf
[Accessed 09 July 2013].

Sawacha, E., Naoum, S. & Fong, D., 1999. Factors affecting safety performance on
construction sites. International Journal of Project Management, 17(5), pp. 309-315.

Seixas, S., Sanders, J., Sheppard, L. & Yost, G., 1998. Exposure Assessment for Acute
Injuries on Construction Sites: Conceptual Development and Pilot Test. Applied
Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 13(5), pp. 304-312.

Shibani, A., Saidani, M. & Alhajeri, M., 2012. Health and safety influence on the
construction project performance in United Arab Emirates (UAE). Journal of Civil
Engineering and Construction Technology, 4(2), pp. 32-44.

Site-Safe, 1999. Construction Safety Management Guide - Best Practice guidelines in

the Management of Health and Safety in Construction. Wellington: Site Safe New
Zealand.

Site-Safe, 2000. The Facts about Construction Injuries. New Zealand: s.n.

56
Tam, C., Fung, I., Yeung, T. & Tung, K., 2003. Relationship Between Construction
Safety Signs and Symbols Recognition and Characteristics of Construction Personnel.
Construction Management and Economics, 21(7), p. 745–753.

Tam, C., Zing, S. & and Deng, Z., 2004. Identifying elements of poor construction
safety management in China. Safety Science, 42(7), p. 569–586.

Teo, E., Ling, F. & Chong, A., 2005. Framework for Project Managers to Manage
Construction Safety. International Journal of Project Management, 23(4), pp. 329-341.

Trakhees, 2013. CIRCULAR: EHS/CS/03/13 - Announcement of Midday Break by

Ministry of Health & Prevention of Heat Stress. [Online]
Available at: http://www.ehss.ae/forms/circular03-
13middaybreakbyministryofhealth&preventionofheatstress.pdf
[Accessed 09 July 2013].

Wells, J., 1986. The Construction Industry in Developing Countries: Alternative

Strategies for Development. London: Routledge Kegan & Paul .

Zou, P., Zhang, G. & Wang, J., 2007. Understanding the key risks in construction
projects in China. International Journal of Project Management, 25(6), p. 601–614.

57
Appendix

58
Appendix A – Sample of Questionnaire Used For the Survey

59
Dear Sir
I am a graduate student at Heriot Watt University in Dubai. I am now preparing a master
Dissertation in the construction Project management program. The title of the Dissertation
is:
Construction Safety and Health Performance in Dubai

The purpose of the study is to evaluate and analyse the factors, which affect the safety
and health performance in construction projects in Dubai. The results of the study will be
of great help to the industry and offering valuable results for all.
As you are one of the large organizations working in this field in Dubai, we are kindly
inviting you to participate in filling this questionnaire with the required data which is an
important element in this study.
Please let your safety personnel or project manager provide the required information
requested in this questionnaire. The information provided by you will be analysed as
whole, and we ensure you that this information will be held in strict confidence and
used for the scientific research purpose only without mentioning the name of your
organization.
We realize that there are numerous demands on your time. However your involvement is
a vital requisite for this study. We appreciate your anticipated cooperation in answering
this questionnaire, which may take less than 30 minutes of your valuable time. After finish
the questionnaire, please send to: zekrimichael@gmail.com
Thank you for your anticipated cooperation.
Best regards.

Yours Sincerely,

MICHAEL ZEKRI

For inquiries and more information please don’t hesitate to contact me on:

Mobile: 00971-050-8428895 Email: zerkimichael@gmail.com

60
61
62
Appendix B – Certificate of Conformity Forms

63
64
65
66
Appendix C – RII Calculation Details

67
 First Category (24) Companies
Factors Affecting the Safety
S.N Very high High Average Low Very low RII Rank
and Health Performance
1 Complexity of the Design 2 8 9 5 0 0.658 17
Type of Owner / Main
2 0 7 12 3 2 0.600 19
Developer
3 Weather Condition 0 5 7 9 3 0.517 20
4 Project Cost 10 12 2 0 0 0.867 9
5 Project Duration 8 10 6 0 0 0.817 13
6 Safety and Health Policy 11 13 0 0 0 0.892 2
Accidents / Incidents / Near
7 11 11 2 0 0 0.875 8
Miss Report
8 Evacuation Plan / Fire drill 8 13 3 0 0 0.842 12
9 Risk Assessment 13 9 2 0 0 0.892 3
10 Safety and Health Training 10 12 1 1 0 0.858 10
Personal Protective
11 10 14 0 0 0 0.883 5
Equipment (PPE)
Emergency Planning and
12 5 11 8 0 0 0.775 14
Procedures
13 Safety and Health Inspection 12 11 1 0 0 0.892 4
Safety and Health
14 8 15 1 0 0 0.858 11
Management Meetings
15 First Aid Arrangements 3 10 11 0 0 0.733 16
16 Welfare Facilities 5 9 10 0 0 0.758 15
Safety Signals, Signs and
17 11 12 1 0 0 0.883 6
Barricades
Work Environment (tide site
18 12 12 0 0 0 0.900 1
)
Reward and Punishment
19 1 9 8 6 0 0.642 18
System (Incentives)
Role of Government and
20 11 12 1 0 0 0.883 7
Engineering Societies

68
 Second Category (20) Companies
Factors Affecting the Safety
S.N Very high High Average Low Very low RII Rank
and Health Performance
1 Complexity of the Design 4 6 8 2 0 0.720 16
Type of Owner / Main
2 1 5 7 5 2 0.580 19
Developer
3 Weather Condition 2 4 7 6 1 0.600 18
4 Project Cost 9 11 0 0 0 0.890 1
5 Project Duration 10 9 1 0 0 0.890 2
6 Safety and Health Policy 9 8 2 1 1 0.860 6
Accidents / Incidents / Near
7 7 8 5 0 0 0.820 9
Miss Report
8 Evacuation Plan / Fire drill 4 7 7 2 0 0.730 15
9 Risk Assessment 6 11 3 0 0 0.830 8
10 Safety and Health Training 5 14 1 0 0 0.840 7
Personal Protective
11 4 14 2 0 0 0.820 10
Equipment (PPE)
Emergency Planning and
12 3 10 7 0 0 0.760 13
Procedures
13 Safety and Health Inspection 6 10 4 0 0 0.820 11
Safety and Health
14 5 4 4 1 0 0.550 20
Management Meetings
15 First Aid Arrangements 3 9 8 0 0 0.750 14
16 Welfare Facilities 6 6 7 1 0 0.770 12
Safety Signals, Signs and
17 9 9 2 0 0 0.870 4
Barricades
18 Work Environment (tide site ) 9 10 1 0 0 0.880 3
Reward and Punishment
19 1 7 7 5 0 0.640 17
System (Incentives)
Role of Government and
20 9 9 2 0 0 0.870 5
Engineering Societies

69
 Third Category (14) Companies
Factors Affecting the Safety
S.N Very high High Average Low Very low RII Rank
and Health Performance
1 Complexity of the Design 1 5 4 4 0 0.643 16
Type of Owner / Main
2 4 5 4 1 0 0.771 8
Developer
3 Weather Condition 3 2 5 4 0 0.657 11
4 Project Cost 7 5 2 0 0 0.871 4
5 Project Duration 7 6 1 0 0 0.886 2
6 Safety and Health Policy 2 4 5 2 1 0.657 12
Accidents / Incidents / Near
7 0 5 5 4 0 0.614 18
Miss Report
8 Evacuation Plan / Fire drill 0 2 7 3 2 0.529 20
9 Risk Assessment 3 6 1 0 0 0.600 19
10 Safety and Health Training 4 8 2 0 0 0.829 7
Personal Protective Equipment
11 8 5 1 0 0 0.900 1
(PPE)
Emergency Planning and
12 2 4 5 2 1 0.657 13
Procedures
13 Safety and Health Inspection 2 6 6 0 0 0.743 9
Safety and Health Management
14 1 5 5 3 0 0.657 14
Meetings
15 First Aid Arrangements 2 4 4 4 0 0.657 15
16 Welfare Facilities 1 5 6 2 0 0.671 10
Safety Signals, Signs and
17 7 6 1 0 0 0.886 3
Barricades
18 Work Environment (tide site ) 6 7 1 0 0 0.871 5
Reward and Punishment System
19 1 5 4 3 1 0.629 17
(Incentives)
Role of Government and
20 6 6 2 0 0 0.857 6
Engineering Societies

70
Appendix D – Kendall coefficient of concordance (W) Calculation

71
 First Second Third
Factors Affecting the Safety
S.N Rank Rank Rank Ri Ŕ S W
and Health Performance
1 Complexity of the Design 17 16 16 952 609 117649 0.053
Type of Owner / Main
2 19 19 8 948 609 114921 0.051
Developer
3 Weather Condition 20 18 11 994 609 148225 0.066
4 Project Cost 9 1 4 292 609 100489 0.045
5 Project Duration 13 2 2 380 609 52441 0.023
6 Safety and Health Policy 2 6 12 336 609 74529 0.033
Accidents / Incidents / Near
7 8 9 18 624 609 225 0.000
Miss Report
8 Evacuation Plan / Fire drill 12 15 20 868 609 67081 0.030
9 Risk Assessment 3 8 19 498 609 12321 0.006
10 Safety and Health Training 10 7 7 478 609 17161 0.008
Personal Protective
11 5 10 1 334 609 75625 0.034
Equipment (PPE)
Emergency Planning and
12 14 13 13 778 609 28561 0.013
Procedures
13 Safety and Health Inspection 4 11 9 442 609 27889 0.012
Safety and Health
14 11 20 14 860 609 63001 0.028
Management Meetings
15 First Aid Arrangements 16 14 15 874 609 70225 0.031
16 Welfare Facilities 15 12 10 740 609 17161 0.008
Safety Signals, Signs and
17 6 4 3 266 609 117649 0.053
Barricades
18 Work Environment (tide site ) 1 3 5 154 609 207025 0.093
Reward and Punishment
19 18 17 17 1010 609 160801 0.072
System (Incentives)
Role of Government and
20 7 5 6 352 609 66049 0.030
Engineering Societies

Total 12180 12180 1539028 0.688

𝟏
𝑹𝒊 = ∑ 𝒎
𝒋=𝟏 𝒓𝒊 𝒋𝒊 Ŕ = 𝟐 𝒎(𝒏 + 𝟏)

𝑛 12𝑆
𝑆 = ∑𝑖=1(𝑅𝑖 − Ŕ)2 𝑊 = 𝑚2 (𝑛3 −𝑛)

Where:
Ri: the total rank given to object i
Ŕ: mean value of these total ranks
n: total number of factors = 20
m: total number of samples = 58
S: sum of squared deviations
W: Kendall's coefficient of concordance

72