Construction sector joint health and safety committees: Can their effectiveness be assessed using the JHSC assessment eTool?

1 Introduction

In Ontario, Joint Health and Safety Committees (JHSCs) are a legal requirement for most workplaces with more than 20 employees or where a regulated designated substance is involved [1, 2]. JHSCs are built on the principles set out in the Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act which highlight the need for collaboration between workers and employers in order to identify, manage and resolve any potential safety issues in the workplace [1, 3]. In addition, JHSCs have a role and responsibility to inspect the workplace on a regular basis and investigate any accidents or work refusals, forming a critical component of the internal responsibility system (IRS) [1, 3]. JHSCs may play a critical role in establishing a culture of health and safety within a workplace and this role may be further amplified when there is significant commitment and support from senior leadership [4].

Prior work has shown that much confusion actually exists within organizations regarding who is responsible and accountable for occupational health and safety [5]. A recent survey of over 170 labor organizations found that over 60% reported outstanding workplace safety and health needs at their institutions [6]. Assuming these organizations have JHSCs and given that JHSCs have a critical role in workplace inspections and identification and management of potential safety issues, this suggests that the mere presence of a JHSC in the workplace does not mean that the committee is effective. However, published literature around the function and evaluation of JHSC effectiveness has been limited and has focused on particular sectors [7–13]. To aid in the assessment of JHSC effectiveness, an electronic assessment tool (eTool) has been developed and tested in the healthcare and education sectors [14–16]. The tool focuses on assessment of attributes for a gold standard JHSC including approachability, representation, commitment, communication with workforce, support and resources, formal written recommendations, education and training, mandate and objectives, JHSC activities, and visibility and leadership [14–16]. The results from this prior body of work suggest that the eTool developed was feasible for use in both single and multi-workplace JHSCs and that the eTool was valued as a mechanism for fostering discussion on the improvement of JHSC function and effectiveness [14–16]. However, the use of this eTool has not yet been tested in the construction sector.

The construction sector has unique legislative requirements in regard to JHSCs. For example, JHSCs are required where a construction project has more than 20 workers and is expected to last more than three months [17]. When a project is expected to last less than three months and no designated substances are used, a JHSC is not required [17]. When construction projects are expected to exceed 3 months, a JHSC is required along with the establishment of a Worker Trade Committee (WTC) [17]. It is the responsibility of the JHSC to establish a WTC which is comprised of members representing each of the trades on the project that are responsible for informing the JHSC of any potential health and safety concerns for workers in those trades [17]. Therefore, WTCs provide additional information to JHSCs regarding safety concerns that may be identified from workers of a specific trade. All members of the WTC are workers and are elected among themselves. In addition to the unique legislative requirements for JHSCs in the construction sector, previous testing of the eTool has been in public sector workplaces, whereas the construction sector is part of private industry. The construction sector may have seasonality shifts in business whereas JHSCs in public sector workforces like healthcare and education may operate consistently throughout the year.

Given these unique legislative requirements for JHSCs in the construction sector and the positive results from testing the JHSC Assessment eTool (both for and single and multi-workplace JHSCs) in the healthcare and education sector [14–16], the objective of our study was to test the usability and feasibility of the JHSC Assessment eTool in the construction sector.

2 Methods

Testing of the JHSC Assessment eTool in the construction sector was carried out in two phases using a non-experimental study design in collaboration with the Infrastructure Health and Safety Association (IHSA). IHSA is one of four sector-focused safe workplace associations that are part of Ontario’s occupational health and safety system and provide training and consultation for workers and employers under provincial jurisdiction. IHSA serves the construction, transportation and electrical and utilities sectors and works closely with both industry partners and labour associations to ensure the safety of workers and eliminate safety hazards in the workplace.

2.2 Phase 1

Figure 1 outlines the research flowchart for our study. In the first phase, construction sector health and safety experts reviewed the content of the eTool to ensure that it had relevance for the sector. The experts were identified through a snowball sampling technique from the two IHSA collaborators and were IHSA consultants. They had broad knowledge and expertise about construction sector occupational health and safety. Specifically, consultants are required to have work experience in the construction sector, have knowledge of occupational health and safety issues in the sector including occupational programs, policies, risks and exposures, and maintain a Canadian Registered Safety Professional designation which requires knowledge of occupational health and safety regulatory requirements, standards and best practices. Each expert was sent the link to the eTool and was asked to go through it and provide their feedback by email to the study investigators. Feedback received was organized according to four categories. Category one included comments that reflected that the tool was a good fit/relevant for the constructor sector. Category two included comments that would be considered “show-stoppers” where major revision of the tool might be required in order to be used in the construction sector. Comments received under category three included any fine tuning/minor improvements suggested for the tool overall while category four comments included any minor improvements suggested to the eTool for the construction sector in particular. If results of Phase one indicated that the eTool was relevant and applicable to the sector, we would proceed to the second phase of the study.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Fig. 1

Flowchart outlining the steps of the research study.

3 Results

The results of our study inform the relevance of the JHSC Assessment eTool for the construction sector specifically. Feedback from construction sector health and safety experts and JHSC members indicated that the tool had value and relevance for use in the sector. Additionally, our study identified several minor areas for refinement including the addition of construction-specific resources in the final report. Overall, the results of our study support the use of the eTool in this sector and can inform the further refinement and testing of it for construction sector workplaces.

Items that scored the lowest on the eTool were also identified as action items and priorities for improvement by participating JHSCs. This alignment suggests that the completion of the eTool and the summary report provided were easy to utilize and potentially helped JHSCs identify where they should focus their improvement efforts. This was also supported by the survey results where members indicated that the feedback received was a valuable feature of the report and action plan.

The construction sector results are similar with what has been observed in both the healthcare and education sectors [14, 16]. Scores for items measuring visibility and leadership (items 10a and 10b) were low overall by participating JHSCs in our study as well as participating JHSCs in the education and healthcare sector [14, 16]. This may suggest that JHSCs, regardless of sector, do not prioritize visibility and leadership activities. Interestingly, a study by Facey et al. [10] collected data from 54 participants across 19 unionized workplaces in the healthcare, hospitality, and communication sectors. Findings suggested that JHSC worker members’ experiences in the everyday processes of JHSCs varied, and that there was limited consensus about the work and value of JHSCs across the numerous workplaces [10]. Participants reported that several employers viewed JHSC work to be non-productive, made limited attempts to accommodate workers for meeting attendance and other JHSC-related duties, and generally discouraged time spent on JHSC activities [10]. These devaluing attitudes and actions by employers towards JHSCs and their related functions may help to explain the low scores in visibility and leadership activities observed in our study and prior work.

Although the mere presence of a JHSC committee does not necessarily translate into a safer workplace [7], our study results show that JHSC members (management and worker representatives) tend to be highly engaged at committee meetings. This may be a reflection of our sampling strategy in this case. However, some research has suggested that increased participation, particularly from management, can translate into lower injury rates [7]. It is also encouraging that education and training were identified as a priority for JHSCs participating in this study as these activities have been shown to be critical components of effective JHSCs [4, 12]. However, the limited training and educational opportunities of JHSC members is not solely an issue in the construction sector [7, 8]. This may be related to evidence that some employers may devalue the work of JHSCs and as a result may not accommodate additional time needed for training and education [10]. JHSCs across sectors may need to advocate for member training and education to ensure that committees are able to operate to their highest function. Mahan et al. [4] provide a detailed account of how health and safety training for all company employees, not just those that may sit on JHSCs, can improve occupational health and safety. However, the authors emphasize and recognize the importance of management commitment and participation in this process which may have not been present to the same extent in our study [4]. Similarly, scores were also low for conducting workplace investigations when a worker is critically injured or killed. This may also be a reflection of the limited accommodations made by employers for additional JHSC activities such as investigations that would take time away from regular worker responsibilities.

Despite the overall acknowledgement of the value of the eTool and some of its features by survey participants, scores for the JHSC Assessment eTool as a means of improving effectiveness of the JHSC were low. This may be because it is not necessarily the eTool that improves effectiveness but rather the actions taken as a result. Additionally, this may reflect the possibility that survey participants already viewed their committees as being effective and therefore the eTool would not have been useful in this regard. The implementation of the eTool into the regular processes of a JHSC may be an important intervention to maximize committee functioning, a critical component of the IRS. For committees that are already high-functioning, this tool can serve as a continuous improvement activity to ensure compliance with JHSC policy or identify future priorities. The eTool is also likely to act as an intervention in and of itself if completed accordingly, as committees are required to fill out the tool together, discussing and coming to a consensus on the answers and the top three priorities of the committee. However, the completion of the eTool only may not be enough if support from management for JHSC activities is not present [10]. Future research is needed to explore if our findings are generalizable across a larger sample in the construction sector specifically and if these results are similar to what was found in the healthcare and education sector. In addition, dissemination of these findings to management and senior leadership is critical as these stakeholders are likely to play a role in the culture of occupational health and safety at an organization. There is also the possibility to extend this research to other sectors where JHSCs are mandated.

The results of this study must be considered in light of the study strengths and limitations. Our study included a small convenience sample of only six JHSCs. We had difficulties in recruiting JHSCs for participation in this study as the information was shared through a third party and the study investigators could not individually reach out to potential JHSCs. As such, the interpretation and generalizability of these findings are limited. Additionally, many JHSCs that initially showed an interest in participating in the study would later report that other tasks had come up and were being prioritized by the committee. Therefore, multiple competing demands for some committees may have limited the time available for participating in our study. The results of this study were however, similar to previous work testing the eTool in other sectors. Although our study included a small sample of participating JHSCs, we were able to gather in-depth feedback from construction sector experts to inform the relevance and tailoring of the eTool for this sector specifically. These data can be used in future research and can inform testing of this tool more broadly in the sector or the development of a sector-specific version of the tool.

5 Conclusion

The results of our study support the use of the JHSC Assessment eTool in the construction sector as a way to assess and discuss JHSC level of functioning. While JHSC functioning is an important prevention strategy, it has not been well-studied and our research fills an important gap in the literature regarding assessment of JHSC functioning in the construction sector specifically. Construction sector inspectors could require construction employers to use the tool if they are found to be in non-compliance with JHSC policy or legislation or if there are issues with their IRS. Managerial implications of this work include the adoption of the eTool into the regular processes and activities of JHSC committees in the construction sector to ensure continuous improvement and self-assessment or in response to a Ministry of Labour order or inspection. While our results are based on a small sample, future research should focus on broader testing throughout this sector to explore if our conclusions are supported. Additionally, our results provide information to inform a refined version of the tool for construction-sector workplaces specifically or for use as part of a larger study examining IRS in workplaces.