Public Humiliation?

TN HR

We are a food manufacturer and as such, must wear hairnets while in the production area (essentially 95% of the plant). Recently, we have experienced an increase in safety violations resulting from ee's who constantly "forget" to wear safety gloves when required.

Our production manager proposed that any violators wear red hairnets instead of our usual white as a form of punishment for not complying with safety rules. This, of course, would result in ridicule from other ee's.

I am divided on this and would appreciate any advice be it good, bad or ugly (Don D)

Thanks,

Gene

Hunter1

Ugly? I say carve a "V" in their foreheads for 'Violator', or , maybe, an "A" for 'Absent safety equipment' : )
Not a good idea. Allow your progressive warning system to work.

rad

That reminds me of when I was in grade school and those who got caught chewing gum had to wear it stuck to the tip of their nose for the rest of the day ...bad idea then, bad idea now.

deniseE

BUT, if you required everyone to wear a red hairnet then supervisors could spot easily those that were not wearing one...it might reduce the number of violations....

just a thought?

Don D

Buy the supervisor a stool and a pointy hat for this idea. No discipline should be public. All discipline should be private. The supervisor certainly deserves to be (privately) told that his idea is the dunce of the month idea. (Where's His Sign?)

JM in ATL

Read Operating Engineers Local 3 v. Johnson, No. A097487, California, 2003

An employee was awarded $10,000 b/c her supervisor litterally advertised in meeting minutes an employees disciplinary reprimand. The employee sued alleging a violation of her right to privacy.

If your manager chooses to do this, I am sure that he can count on low morale and high turn over. But at least you warned him of the punitive damages he could face.

Hatchetman

For the best advice on the requirement to wear a RED HAIRNET for violating the workforce standards of proper conduct, consult Nathaniel Hawthorne.

LarryC

Hey, good one, Hatchetman.

sonny

Agree with the others. . NOT a good idea.

ray a

We discussed a topic very similar to this last summer - making new hires wear special colored vests so they stand out - and the consensus then was, bad idea.

Balloonman

This is why you have a disciplinary process. I have been a safety manager at two meat plants. Enforce the discipline. Go through the steps, and let the union know in no uncertain terms you will terminate. It is safety and USDA issue that could get you shut down. People getting scalped is a horrible thing.
Follow the contract. Every time discipline is issued let the employee and union know that you intend to continue discipling up to and including termination.
My $0.02 worth.
DJ The Balloonman

rad

I thought of the contract provisions too but thought there is no way this would even be considered in a union shop.

safety

OK, here goes. This is a great idea in theory, bad idea for execution. Follow your progressive discipline for any safety violation and keep the discipline confidential. It looks to me as if your first line supervisor wants to have an easy method of knowing at all times where the past violators are located. Again, great idea but hard to implement. How about this; during the discipline process for any ee, for glove violations or any safety violation, make it personal! Show him/her the reason for the safety glove, i.e. all ten fingers on each hand to protect, and show him/her some WC numbers from past hand injuries. Implement a behavioral safety process where members of your safety team can give positive and negative feedback to the violators. For example, “Hey Brenda, you know that I always see you with your PPE on but just a little while ago you did not have your safety gloves on. We need to always have the proper PPE in place for our protection. What would your life be like if you lost one or more fingers on either hand? Are there reasons that are preventing you from wearing the PPE? Thanks for your hard work and remember to wear your PPE, keep working safe.” Just my thoughts.

mwild31

Hi TN HR - is this manager's proposal being seriously considered? I know you asked the question, but were you just asking to ask or are you guys seriously considering this as an option?

Balloonman

We changed our safety incentive program to eliminate those who get written up three times for violating safety rules/procedures. The feeling is we want our employees to follow the safe procedures. Safe actions = safe results.
My $0.04 worth.
DJ The Balloonman

Don D

Safety incentives? We don't pay people extra for doing what they should do in the first place. We do, however, fire them if they do not.

TN HR

Thank you to all who replied. Yes, this issue is being seriously considered. Progressive discipline does not seem to be working as a deterrent. We have tried different approaches, including additional training, increased awareness, graphic pictures of amputations on the safety board, etc, etc.

I have to admit that the little devil voice part of me wants to do it. I know I wil get flamed for this but so be it. At the end of the day, when all else fails, an employee loosing face versus three fingers is a risk I can live with.

Cinderella

Graphic pictures of amputations? NICE! Time for lunch yet? =P~

TN HR, when you say progressive discipline does not seem to work are you saying that watching their fellow co-workers get written up (for example) once, twice, three times and then fired is doing zip for these folks? Just want to make sure I'm understanding what you're saying here.

POPEYE

Gene,
I have been in your facility several times and I am amazed that someone would not want to wear safety glasses, especially in the "onion" room. We have a door access system and require that each EE wear their picture badge where it is visible. If someone forgets their badge, we have bright PINK temporary badges for them to wear. It only takes one day of ridicule about wearing pink and they do not forget the badge again.