Meat + Poultry - October 2009 - 113

RISK MANAGEMENT

In this instance, continual communication with employees regarding
safety procedures may have prompted
this operator to think twice before defeating the guard and prompted him
to talk to a supervisor and about a better way to clean the machine.
All too often companies see the
consequences of not having a riskmanagement and safety program
in place. For example, a global food

Emphasize
potentially
hazardous areas of the
machine and safeguards
that are in place to
prevent injury.
manufacturer of baking and packaging equipment had two signifi cant losses in 1999 and 2000 at its
customers' facilities totaling more
than $1.4 million. One incident resulted in a fi re and the other caused
an amputation.
While the events were ultimately
defended and covered by insurance,
the indirect costs from senior managers' time spent with incident management including depositions and
interrogations, as well as damage to
goodwill, was equal to or greater than
the insurance payout.
The manufacturer, in partnership
with an insurance broker, learned
that certain safety measures were either overlooked or not documented
on these incidents. Even the manner
in which the manufacturer managed
the incidents created culpability that
was avoidable.
As a result, the equipment supplier decided to incorporate a prod-

uct-safety program centered on a
risk-assessment methodology. The
program began with senior management creating a steering committee
to make a "culture change" from the
top down, relative to safety in design,
manufacturing, installation and servicing equipment. It also engaged key
end-users to assist with its new focus
as a means to mend and enhance both
the company's reputation and business relationships.
The process took two years from
introduction to deployment, but the
manufacturer realized some immediate benefits in insurance rates because it was able to demonstrate a
proactive approach to safety in its
design and manufacturing operations. This resulted in a significant
reduction in premiums, given the
fact the company had such severe
losses just two years earlier.
With global sales of $200 million,
this manufacturer saw warranty claims
drop 2 percent over several years,
which added $4 million to its bottom
line. Lastly, the manufacturer recognized that a good safety program,
which can be articulated and shared
with end-users, resulted in more sales
and sales opportunities.
Avoiding the inevitable - When
an employee deems it necessary to bypass or defeat the safety features originally installed on a machine, it must
be reported to supervisors along with
an explanation for the action. The issue should also be communicated to
the equipment manufacturer so a safer, more viable solution can be found.
By including the manufacturer
in the problem-solving process, the
processor greatly decreases the likelihood of unintended consequences.
It is also possible that the processor is
not the fi rst to make such modifications. The manufacturer may already
have a solution to the problem. There
is no need to reinvent the wheel, increase risk or create safety issues.
If an operator has already modified a machine, this change must be
communicated to the service techni-

114 * Meat&Poultry * October 2009 * www.MeatPoultry.com

cian, engineer or sales personnel from
the manufacturer that regularly visits
the facility. The representative should
document the concern, report it to
their company and follow-up with
the customer with acknowledgement
and/or a remedy for the issue.
Open communication is a key to
a strong risk-management and safety partnership. Before installing a
machine in a customer's facility, the
supplier should make its risk-management and safety procedures known.
The processor needs to understand
what to do if a safety issue arises on
the machine and know how the supplier will respond to a safety issue,
or to issues the manufacturer's reps
identify during a facility inspection.
Protecting the future - As in
one of the examples mentioned, if
several end-users have deemed it
necessary to bypass or defeat the
same safety feature on a particular
machine, it is a clear sign the manufacturer needs to more closely review
that area of the machine. If changes
or updates to the machine are necessary, it is the responsibility of the
machinery manufacturer to communicate these updates to all its customers using that machine.
The manufacturer has to consider
whether it will provide the update to
customers free of charge or by purchase. A knowledgeable industry legal
or insurance professional will be able to
advise manufacturers on these options.
If a modification has already been
made by the processor's machine operator, the service technician, engineer
or sales professional learning of the alteration should communicate the details and results (positive or negative)
to the customer's main point of contact,
as well as to the machinery manufacturing company supervisor.
Documentation of any modifications to equipment should be filed. This
paper trail should include any safety
concerns that were noted. If safety
concerns are noted, a follow-up letter
must be sent to the customer identifying personnel involved, concerns and

http://www.MeatPoultry.com

Meat + Poultry - October 2009

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Meat + Poultry - October 2009