Cellphone Hr

download Cellphone Hr

of 12

  • date post

    14-Apr-2018
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    214
  • download

    0

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Cellphone Hr

  • 7/30/2019 Cellphone Hr

    1/12

    HOW TO CONTROL EMPLOYEE USE OF

    CELL PHONES & TEXTING

    Can ONE TEXT MESSAGEDestroy Your Business?

    THE EL EC TRONIC W ORKPL ACE

    Volume 1

  • 7/30/2019 Cellphone Hr

    2/12

    For over 18 years, Bongarde has been one of the most innovative safety information companies in theworld. Our product line is designed to give you, the safety professional, the very best tools available fordoing your job.

    Our safety training tools are designed to help you quickly and easily implement a safety program thattargets your companys toughest safety challenges, reduces accidents and injuries, and achieves mea-surable performance results.

    Our safety compliance products tell you in plain-English exactly what-to-do and how-to-do-it to pro-tect your company, your managers and yourself from costly penalties, nes and liability under the latestlaws and regulations.

    Just as important, our customer service makes it easy for you to nd the products you want, and getthe service and support you deserve.

    Prove it to yourself. Talk to one of our Safety Solution Specialists. Take a test drive. Sign up for a free trial.Put us to work making your workplace safer.

    Your satisaction is guaranteed.

    Bongarde Media Company

    Bongarde Media Company

    Editorial Ofce

    300 Main St., 6th Fl., Stamford, CT, 06901

    Canadian Mailing Address

    501 Main St., Penticton, BC V2A 9A6

    US Mailing Address

    103 Eastside Oroville Rd., Oroville, WA, 98844

  • 7/30/2019 Cellphone Hr

    3/12

    TABLE OF CONTENTS

    WHAT IS THE COST 4

    WHAT THE LAW SAYS 6

    WRITE A POLICY 8

    SAMPLE POLICY 10

  • 7/30/2019 Cellphone Hr

    4/12

    WHAT IS THE LACK OF A CELL PHONE

    POLICY COSTING YOU?Talking on cell phones and texting at work is distracting andoften minimizes productivityespecially when the com-munication isnt work-related. It can also increase the risk ofaccidents. And its not just a trac safety issue. While most of

    society has caught on to the dangers of cell phones and tex-ting while driving, these practices may be even more danger-ous to workers on assembly lines, operating heavy machineryor performing other safety sensitive jobs that dont involveholding a steering wheel in their hands. And while injuries atwork are never a good thing, in this economy, the costs of aworkplace accident can spell ruin.

    Dont take solace from the fact that your company complieswith Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) laws. Althoughthe gap is starting to close, the safety laws are lagging far be-

    hind in terms of addressing the risks posed by cell phone andtexting (which, for simplicitys sake, well refer to collectivelyas cell phones) distractions. OHS laws dont are just begin-ning to grapple with the cell phone problem. What you needto protect workers against injuryand your company againstliabilityis a cell phone use policy that goes beyond the lawand provides a real, workable solution. This article will showyou how to create one based on the cutting edge examplesdeveloped by progressive employers across Canada. Theresalso a Model Form you can adapt on page x.

    HAZARDS OF CELL PHONES AT WORKTheres plenty of free information on the internet document-ing the dangers of cell phones and driving.. But lets concen-trate on the stu thats scarcer and harder to nd: informationabout the workplace risks caused by cell phones that arentrelated to driving. Cell phones pose two kinds of risks toworkers:

    Distractions - Its not just the workers who drive that needto have their wits about them at all times. Cell phones

    are distracting not only because they require attention tooperate but because the conversation itself engages theworkers mind on something other than the job at hand.For example, in a recent New Brunswick incident, a roadconstruction worker talking on his cell phone was so dis-tracted that he stepped in front of a half-ton truck.

    Entanglements - Much like jewellery, which is oftenbanned in industrial workplaces, cell phone devices canget entangled in machinery or interfere with the properuse of personal protective equipment. For example,hands-free earpieces might loosen hearing or head pro-tection; or, a worker may remove his safety gloves to senda text on his cell phone.

    WHATISTHECOST?

    ALARMING STATISTICS 85% of respondents use their cell

    phones while driving, 30% usetheir phones while driving on thehighway, and 27% use them dur-ing half or more of their durationdriving*

    84% believe that using a cellphone while driving greatlyincreases their likeliness of being

    in an accident*

    81% believe that talking or tex-ting on the phone are the TWOMOST DANGEROUS BEHAVIOURSthat occur behind the wheel*

    texting while driving causes a400% increase in time spent witheyes o the road**

    a car driver dialing a cell phoneis 2.8 times more likely to get in acar crash**

    a driver reaching for a cell phoneis 1.4 times more likely to get in acar crash**

    a car driver talking on a hands-free device is 1.3 times morelikely to get in a car crash**

    A DRIVER TEXTING IS 23.2 TIMESMORE LIKELY TO GET IN A CARCRASH**

    for every 6 seconds of drive time,

    a driver sending or receiving atext message spends 4.6 of thoseseconds with their eyes OFF THEROAD***

    3000 Canadians die each yearfrom trac accidents - it isestimated that over half of thoseaccidents are tied to driver dis-tractions, LIKE TEXTING*

    * 2008 Statistics Canada

    ** 2008 Liberty Mutual InsuranceGroup study

    *** 2009 Virgina Tech TransportationInstitute

  • 7/30/2019 Cellphone Hr

    5/12

    IN THE NEWS - THE COST OF CELLPHONES

    TRAIN IN FATAL CRASH HAD

    EMERGENCY BRAKE ONInvestigators also fnd evidence thatthe train was in automatic mode, mean-ing the onboard computer should haveslowed it down. Mondays wreck killed-nine people.

    Reporting from Washington The operator of the Metrotrain that slammed into a stationary train apparently hadactivated the emergency brake in a failed eort to stopbefore the deadly collision, federal ocials said Tuesday, asthey searched for the cause of Mondays wreck that killednine and injured 80.

    Debbie Hersman of the National Transportation SafetyBoard said the emergency brake was depressed, and thesteel rails showed evidence that the brakes were engaged.

    Investigators also said the moving train had been in auto-matic mode, which means onboard computers should havecontrolled its speed and stopped it before it got too close tothe stationary train.

    In addition, Metro sources said, the rst two cars of thattrain were two months overdue for scheduled maintenanceof some braking components.

    Taken together, experts say, these facts point to severalpossible scenarios: The operator activated the brake toolate; the computers that are supposed to stop a train fromgetting too close to another train faltered; the trains brakesfailed; or some combination of those. Some passengers onthe striking train have said they never felt the train slowdown.

    A team of NTSB investigators painstakingly searchedthrough the tangled heap of metal on the tracks just north

    of the Fort Totten Station in northeast Washington. Theywere examining the trains, track and signals; the actions

    of the operator and her downtown supervisors; and thecomputers that control train movement and are supposedto prevent crashes. Investigators will also look at mainte-nance performed this month on the computerized traincontrol system along the stretch of track where the crashtook place.

    Ocials began to remove the train cars Tuesday and planto experiment with similar trains to determine approximatespeed and stopping distance, Hersman said. The crash, theforce of which vaulted the rear train atop the other, oc-curred on a curve where the speed limit is 59 mph, Hersmansaid.

    Todays experiment will also try to determine whether thecurve, or anything else, obstructed the operators view ofthe stopped train. The operator, Jeanice McMillan, 42, wasamong those who died in the accident. Investigators willexamine her cellphone and text-messaging records, reviewher work and rest schedule, and analyze blood samples, allstandard NTSB procedures.

    By Lena H. Sun and Lyndsey Layton|June 24, 2009Reproduced from The Washington Post

    The NTSB confrmed the operator was texting and

    that this event led to the derailment.

    We have a fre problem, a medical prob-lem and a possible haz-mat problem

    rom the leaked uel, Davies told KNBC.

    18 Dead in

    Sept 13, 2008

    Metrolink

    Train Crash,

    over 130

    seriouslyinjured

  • 7/30/2019 Cellphone Hr

    6/12

    WHATTHELAWSAYS

    WHAT THE LAW SAYS

    Employers have a duty to safeguard workers from the risks posed by cell phone use at work.The obligation is rooted in three sets of laws:

    1. OHS LAWS

    Cell phone use isnt one o the workplace hazards addressed in provincial OHS laws.

    Exception: Albertas OHS Code 2009 restricts the use of cell phones near electric detonatorsused in blasting operations [Secs. 503(3) and (4)]. However, as we saw when discussing uprotections, every OHS act includes a general duty clause requiring employers to take stepsto guard against known risks. This may include use of cell phones on the job, especially if youknow or should know that such a problem exists at your workplace.

    2. Trac Safety Laws

    Several provinces, including MB, NL, NS, ON and QC, have or are considering adopting tra-

    c saety laws that ban drivers rom talking on handheld cell phones. In fact, at the time this

    report was being written, Ontario had just passed this law.These rules cover all drivers, includingworkers driving to or