Safety climate and its relationship with furniture companies’ safety performance and workers’ risk acceptance

This study aims to analyse the relationship between safety climate and the level of risk acceptance, as well as its relationship with workplace safety performance. The sample includes 14 companies and 403 workers. The safety climate assessment was performed by the application of a Safety Climate in Wood Industries questionnaire and safety performance was assessed with a checklist. Judgements about risk acceptance were measured through questionnaires together with four other variables: trust, risk perception, benefit perception and emotion. Safety climate was found to be correlated with workgroup safety performance, and it also plays an important role in workers’ risk acceptance levels. Risk acceptance tends to be lower when safety climate scores of workgroups are high, and subsequently, their safety performance is better. These findings seem to be relevant, as they provide Occupational, Safety and Health practitioners with a better understanding of workers’ risk acceptance levels and of the differences among workgroups.

Safety climate and its relationship with furniture companies’ safety performance and workers’ risk acceptance

This study aims to analyse the relationship between safety climate and the level of risk acceptance, as well as its relationship with workplace safety performance. The sample includes 14 companies and 403 workers. The safety climate assessment was performed by the application of a Safety Climate in Wood Industries questionnaire and safety performance was assessed with a checklist. Judgements about risk acceptance were measured through questionnaires together with four other variables: trust, risk perception, benefit perception and emotion. Safety climate was found to be correlated with workgroup safety performance, and it also plays an important role in workers’ risk acceptance levels. Risk acceptance tends to be lower when safety climate scores of workgroups are high, and subsequently, their safety performance is better. These findings seem to be relevant, as they provide Occupational, Safety and Health practitioners with a better understanding of workers’ risk acceptance levels and of the differences among workgroups.

Iowa Department of Public Safety Performance Report, FY 2004

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Department of Public Safety Performance Plan, FY 2009

Agency Performance Plan, Iowa Department of Public Safety

Analysis of Existing Work-Zone Devices with MASH Safety Performance Criteria, TPF-5(018), 2009

Crashworthy, work-zone, portable sign support systems accepted under NCHRP Report No. 350 were analyzed to predict their safety peformance according to the TL-3 MASH evaluation criteria. An analysis was conducted to determine which hardware parameters of sign support systems would likely contribute to the safety performance with MASH. The acuracy of the method was evaluated through full-scale crash testing. Four full-scale crash tests were conducted with a pickup truck. Two tall-mounted, sign support systems with aluminum sign panels failed the MASH criteria due to windshield penetration. One low-mounted system with a vinyl, roll-up sign panel failed the MASH criteria due to windshield and floorboard penetration. Another low-mounted system with an aluminum sign panel successfully met the MASH criteria. Four full-scale crash tests were conducted with a small passenger car. The low-mounted tripod system with an aluminum sign panel failed the MASH criteria due to windshield penetration. One low-mounted system with aluminum sign panel failed the MASH criteria due to excessive windshield deformation, and another similar system passed the MASH criteria. The low-mounted system with a vinyl, roll-up sign panel successfully met the MASH criteria. Hardware parameters of work-zone sign support systems that were determined to be important for failure with MASH include sign panel material, the height to the top of the mast, the presence of flags, sign-locking mechanism, base layout and system orientation. Flowcharts were provided to assist manufacturers when designing new sign support systems.

Iowa Department of Public Safety Performance Report, FY2004

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Department of Public Safety Performance Report, FY2005

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Department of Public Safety Performance Report, FY2006

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Department of Public Safety Performance Report, FY2007

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Department of Public Safety Performance Report, FY2008

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Department of Public Safety Performance Report, FY2011

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Department of Public Safety Performance Report, FY2010

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Department of Public Safety Performance Report, FY2012

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Department of Public Safety Performance Report, FY2013

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Department of Public Safety Performance Plan, FY2014

Agency Performance Plan, Iowa Department of Public Safety