Safety must be taken into account in production; how do you handle this in your daily work?

The main focus of safety is the workers on the front line, as it is they who carry out the operations directly. Those in secondary or tertiary positions have a lower likelihood of encountering safety issues. Therefore, those responsible for production must also take care of safety matters, and it is necessary to encourage everyone to shift from a mindset of \"I need to be safe\" to one of \"I want to be safe.\" Production managers, in particular, should always give top priority to safety. As for safety officers, in my opinion, their role should be more focused on supervision and providing reminders. Of course, safety officers should also conduct regular safety training on site, especially for new workers

This post was last edited by ds66616 on 2019-5-12 at 20:49. Safety is the guarantee of production; production must give priority to safety. Everything said above is correct. But production and safety are separated from each other, and sometimes, unintentionally, production and safety are set against one another. Today’s companies have established safety departments and assigned safety officers in accordance with regulatory requirements. However, company leaders regard these safety departments and officers as those responsible for addressing safety hazards. Under such circumstances, it is difficult for these safety departments and officers to determine their proper role, and they often end up acting as firefighters, busy with routine, task-oriented work. Only when the organizers and managers in the production department consider safety as an essential factor at every stage – planning, arrangement, implementation, and completion and delivery – and take the initiative to address it and prepare for smooth progress in subsequent steps, can true safe production be achieved

This post was last edited by zhaopeng02 on 2019-5-14 at 10:04. Learn about DuPont’s top ten safety principles: risk identification must be carried out for each task, along with the development of tailored solutions. However, managers at all levels as well as operators have their own responsibilities regarding safety. For example, when loosening flange bolts, it is necessary to check whether there are any materials or pressure present; the bolts that have been removed should be properly stored. Bolts should be loosened in such a way that their faces face the opposite direction, to prevent residual pressure or materials from spraying out and causing injury. These are all aspects that team members need to consider in terms of risk identification. It is important that safety responsibilities are clearly defined, although there are many gray areas in this regard. The most important thing is safety – everyone needs to be involved in it; everyone can act as a safety officer and point out any violations.

Unification is definitely necessary; if managers do not pay attention to safety, then employees will pay even less attention to it. It is essential to integrate knowledge with action!

Thank you for the invitation. I’ve been riding to Beijing to attend an event these past few days, so I didn’t have time to check in; I happen to have some free time today. First, to answer the first question of the super edition: both the \"right\" and \"wrong\" opinions have their merits as well as their flaws; it’s not meant to confuse people – this is indeed the reality in domestic security work at present. Let’s first talk about the overall situation. Although it is essential to manage safety alongside production, the scope of safety is extremely wide – ranging from missions to the moon to things as simple as eating and drinking, all of which fall under the category of safety. The domestic safety culture started late and is relatively underdeveloped; in particular, the concepts are vague and the division of responsibilities is unclear – this is a common issue. Of course, there are some large companies that do a good job at this, but they are few in number, and they tend to keep their practices to themselves, making it difficult to promote them elsewhere. Coupled with the disorderly development of the chemical industry in recent years, the shortage of specialized talent, and the irrationality of holding people accountable after incidents occur, there are increasingly fewer professionals working in the field of safety. Moreover, those in charge of safety often lack a voice; most companies still operate under a primitive safety culture in which safety serves production purposes. After all, for these companies, profit is what matters most, so the principle of putting safety first remains merely a slogan. If a company cannot survive and goes bankrupt, then there is no talk of safety. Let me talk about my company and the nearby companies I am familiar with: Safety personnel are primarily responsible for ensuring the proper execution of special operations, preparing for inspections, conveying and responding to orders from higher-level authorities, providing technical support related to safety improvements, organizing activities to identify and address potential hazards as well as conducting drills, offering safety training, and carrying out routine safety inspections. Shop or team safety officers may handle more specific tasks; they also assess risks or provide supervision for various daily operations that could pose hazards. The key question is: which department is responsible for overseeing shop safety officers? Put simply, whose should we listen to? Who will adopt or listen to the suggestions for improvement? Some routine workshop tasks are as simple and low-risk as eating and drinking, but there are still people who choke while eating or get choked on water – is this due to inadequate supervision? (Common problems) To take the simplest example: improper wearing of safety helmets. It’s impossible to monitor this 24/7; and if a supervisor notices it, does one have to call in a safety officer? The purpose is simply to point out that there is inadequate effort in carrying out safety work and insufficient inspections. Issues related to personal safety are everyone’s responsibility, not just that of those in charge of safety. Some people think that protective gear and safety helmets are meant for managers and those responsible for safety. In China, those working in safety spend too much time on various safety inspections, as well as on preparing documents over and over again, and doing miscellaneous tasks. Non-experts end up overseeing matters that should be handled by experts. How many accidents occur just before or during inspections? Where is all this time and effort being spent? Can nothing go wrong? Abroad, those in charge of security are called security experts, and they are there to solve problems. In China, they are referred to as security staff, whose role is to handle miscellaneous tasks and meet inspection requirements; their duties are scattered, their attention is divided, and the level of importance given to their work is not comparable at all, which is why there is a big difference in the standard of security. It’s not that I am pro-Western or worship foreign countries; whether it was the invasion of Japan and Germany in the past, or the United States’ attempts to cause trouble nowadays, good practices and management methods should indeed be learned from, and long-standing problems must be completely eradicated. As for uncertain situations, it depends on the company’s management style and division of responsibilities. For example, the equipment requires thorough cleaning and replacement, and the processes involved in this area are more specialized – tasks such as cleaning the equipment, removing or installing blind flanges, and using nitrogen for purging. Safety professionals are better equipped to assess the hazards associated with materials and identify risks, as well as to oversee operations. By working together, discussing issues, and clarifying responsibilities, it is possible to carry out the work more effectively; otherwise, there will be no way to avoid accountability when problems arise. Just talking nonsense temporarily – my thinking, logic, and language are all rather chaotic. Please be understanding; P

Thank you to my old friend for the enthusiastic exchanges and discussions! Whether it is production or technology, the safety and stability of production as well as the reliability of process technologies must be given top priority ； Those working in safety need to be more professional both in terms of theoretical knowledge and management skills, rather than ending up playing a mere supporting role: lol

It’s just a discussion of the current situation and some minor complaints; there is still a long way to go in terms of the safety culture in our country. However, things are getting better, and the status and rights of those working in the field of safety will continue to improve. **The construction of chemical industrial parks, the transformation and upgrading of the chemical industry, as well as environmental inspections – all these measures taken in recent years aim at standardization and stricter regulations, which is a good thing for us in the chemical industry and those working in safety fields. It’s truly admirable when, in a company or an organization, everyone takes safety as their own responsibility!

1. Some enterprises are small in scale and have poor technical capabilities, and thus do not meet the requirements for sustainable economic and social development at present. 11. The Zhangjiakou accident and the Xiangshui explosion on March 21st have served as warnings to us: rapid economic development does not go hand in hand with safe corporate operations ； The problem of companies prioritizing production over safety and adopting lax management practices has not been effectively addressed. Some bosses even put laws and regulations aside and ignore rules and regulations ； Some treat standardization and evaluation reports as worthless, and even resort to fraud just to pass inspections; some employees regard regulations as a joke, giving them importance in words but neglecting them in practice, and ignoring them when busy; others see training as a burden and assessments as mere formalities. 2. Supervisors at all levels rely on meetings to implement decisions and on documents to carry out tasks; there is enthusiasm at the top level but less so at lower levels. Some supervisors lack determination, make many promises but fail to deliver, and do not conduct their work thoroughly.