Hi Steph

For starters I would start with looking at starting with a risk profile by establish what risk are in your business, what incidents could happen which would lead to these risks and what controls you would put in place to mitigate the risk.

Start simple by drawing up a table with the following heading:
Risk Identification
Events that could cause possible harm
Rating (stick to medium, high or low)
Control
Monitoring mechanism
https://worksafe.govt.nz/managing-health-and-safety/managing-risks/how-to-manage-work-risks

Once done you can look at the "events" column and do your classifications. This is best done in a group environment.

Worksafe around the block is a good starting point to get an idead of the different potential classifications and contols
https://worksafe.govt.nz/the-toolshed/tools/around-the-block/

Keep the classifications simple e.g
Property damage covers vehicle, plant and equipment
Near miss is a accident that almost happens
Injury is anything that touches the body (Report only, First Aid Injury, Medical Treatment Injury, Loss Time Injury and Fatality)
Secuity - theft
Community - effect other businesses
Environmental - oil spills

Regards
Tracy R

Hi Tracy, thanks for that. We have things to that degree established, but to complete the statistics across various pre-quals requires reclassifying and reconfiguring data to report. For example, IsnNetworld - Northpower client - requires vehicle incidents above $1000 in damages, it does not distinguish where the fault rests. Constantly re classifying statistics in response to clients prequals has raised questions for me. Would be good to know what is the rule of thumb for a consistent approach!

HI Carolyn, thank you! nice to know I am not alone in this!

Hi Steph.... Oh I feel your pain!

What should guide you, is consideration of how the classifications could be used to give your business any valuable insight.

But alas... I am dreaming of an ideal world, without ridiculous pre-qualification requirements demanding you slice and dice your statistics in a specific way... if only so your client can put them into a pretty graph for some meaningless report. Sigh.

If you are ready to go deep, might I suggest you have a read of Challenging the Safety Quo by @Craig Marriott, especially Part II.

HI Tania....Auckland Libraries have a copy and I have ordered :) Thanks for your comment, my thoughts too

Hi Steph,

I work for Northpower and I'd be keen to find out more about the vehicle incident data that you have to classify? I've talked to the key person for the ISNet pre-qualification of contractors and she has indicated that we don't request any vehicle incident data so, (if you don't mind!) would you please contact her or myself so we can better understand your issue? I'll PM you the details.

Many thanks, Julie

On to it!

We use simple classifications.
Proactive incidents - Unsafe acts, Unsafe conditions, near miss
Reactive incidents - First Aid/Minor, Medical treatment (MTI), Restricted work (RWT), Lost Time (LTI), property damage and environmental.
Corrective actions designed to eliminate or minimise future risks.
No rewards or messages for "day's since last incident".
Recording stats is only part of the job. I believe corrective actions is where most improvement opportunity is lost. No corrective actions imposed or implemented, status quo prevails.

We count hours as:
Hours worked in the month/people/working days.
This gives us a number that shows how busy the place is. Overtime worked and other stress builders. This is graphed and shows when we should be vigilant around safety control measures.

Hi, thanks Bruce, I have seen that we are meant to count stand down hours too, unfortunately this is more about consistency across the reporting platforms that sometimes slice and dice information in different ways. North Power have confirmed they don't need vehicle stats, but as mentioned early the safety statistics for IsNetworld require anything over $1000 cost, irrespective of where the fault rests (as in could be an incident in a company car outside work hours). The work your doing around hours looks really interesting at discussions around risks too.