|
SAFETY - A Global Perspective |
||||
| [<<] PREVIOUS PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT [>>] | ||||
|
SPEECH
DIRECTORY: SAFETY AT IAIS History New Plan Summary Results Post 9/11 SAFETY OVERSEAS Local Conditions Safety Regulation Definition of Incidents Varied Needs Diverse Environments Results RDC's Philosophy CONCLUSION Q & A SESSION CONCLUDING COMMENTS |
(Mr.
Posner’s remarks continued)
|
|||
|
Graph D - Frequency Ratio (per 200,000 Employee Hours) 
|
|
|||
But even in Guatemala where we have 114 employees running through garbage dumps, squatter camps, etc. we are consistently reducing the number of injuries (Graph E). The reason is simple: because we have made Safety a priority. Ferrovias Guatemala Safety History - Results |
||||
Graph
E - Injuries |
||||
| RDC
- Safety Philosophy Overseas
What is RDC’s safety philosophy overseas? It is exactly the same philosophy emphasized earlier in relation to the Iowa Interstate, at least in some respects. Just like on the Iowa Interstate we like to take an even-handed approach toward discipline, meaning you are not trying to catch, trap, or punish people. You are there to guide them and to make sure the rules are understood and enforced. Safety is a top-down priority. It is the first thing we talk about at Board meetings, and it is the first thing we ask about. We are personally invested in safety. Management compensation is tied to safety. People’s bonuses have a big safety component; that way everyone is on the same page. When people understand that you are serious and committed, that makes it a lot easier. In line with Denny’s comments, we have not outsourced or contained safety; we do not have a full-time safety professional because each of us are full-time safety professionals. It is part of the central objectives at the top of our organizations. However, in the overseas environment there are things that are different. One thing I need to point out is that RDC is focused on Continuous Improvement; this means that for each country, based on its local conditions, we want to see it constantly get better. Whatever those conditions are, we are looking for continuous improvement as opposed to holding them to a standard that would apply in a place like the USA or even Estonia. The other thing that we have done is to offer the FRA as the International Best Practice. In many cases countries, as I pointed out earlier, have felt the need to create their own regulatory agency. We have therefore gone out of our way to recommend the FRA International Department as a gateway to what we feel to be the best practice and the FRA has been very good about offering their cooperation on a government-to-government basis. The government agency asks for help, then the FRA as a U.S. Government entity, can then respond. It has been very helpful. |
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
