1. Dr. Lu Yuan, CSP 985-549-2189 Lu.Yuan@selu.edu
Construction Substance-Abuse Programs & Safety Incentives OSHE 382, Spring 2016
Dr. Lu Yuan, CSP

2. History of Drug-Testing Programs
1914, Ford Motor Company profit-sharing plan
1960s, collective bargaining agreements
1980s, laboratory test
1986, Executive Order – Drug-Free Federal Workplace
1988, Drug-Free Workplace Act
1991, Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act

3. History of Drug-Testing Programs
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), Division of Workplace Programs
Department of Labor, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy Working Partners Program (discontinued)

4. Drug Testing is a Controversial Issue
Those against:
Measure use of illegal drugs rather than performance impairment
Dissolution times are different
Reliability of the drug-testing procedures
Increased legal liability

5. Drug Testing is a Controversial Issue
Those in favor:
Drug testing reduces the number and severity of accidents, workers’ compensation claims, injury rates, and EMRs.
It also improves custom relations.
A causal relationship between drug use and accident occurrence is warranted.

6. Components of Drug-Testing Programs
Types:
Pre-hire testing
Post-hire testing
Procedures based on federal requirements:
Laboratory test
Cut-off levels for report
Use of medical review officers
Safeguards to ensure consistent treatment of samples

7. Drug-Testing in Construction
In 1983, less than 1% of employees were subject to drug testing. Today, approximately 49% of full-time workers between the ages of 18 and 49 are subject to some type of workplace drug testing (SAMHSA 1999). This growth is particularly evident in the construction industry.
It was estimated that in 1997, 14.1% of full-time construction workers between the ages of 18 and 49 were current illicit drug users and that 12.4% engaged in heavy alcohol use. This percentage is nearly double the national average for all industries, 7.7 and 7.6%, respectively (SAMHSA 1999).
Gerber, J.K. and Yacoubian Jr., G.S. (2001) Evaluation of drug testing in the workplace: Study of the construction industry. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 127:6,

8. Gerber and Yacoubian Jr.’s Study
Data for the study was collected through a survey which was sent to a randomly selected national sample of officials at construction companies.
The data examined included injury incident rates and workers’ compensation experience-rating modification factors compiled over a five-year period and supplied by the National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI).

9. Gerber and Yacoubian Jr.’s Study
The study shows that the implementation of a drug-free workplace program directly influences a reduction in
Injury incident rates,
Workers’ compensation experience-rating modification factors, and
Workers’ compensation premiums.

10. Other Findings of Gerber and Yacoubian Jr.’s Study
Reasons for implementing drug-testing programs include:
To promote the safety of their workers and those who use their products and services.
Drug testing contributes positively to a company’s image.
Drug testing is an effective deterrent in preventing drug abuse.

11. Other Findings of Gerber and Yacoubian Jr.’s Study
Important barriers to implementing drug-testing programs include:
A concern for increased legal liability
Testing could be too costly.
State laws prohibiting or restricting an employers’ right to drug test significantly hinder the implementation of programs.

12. Summary: Drug-Testing
All drug testing must be conducted as part of a comprehensive drug-prevention program aimed at preventing and managing substance abuse in the workplace. (Gerber and Yacoubian Jr., 2001)
What Do You Think?

13. Incentive
Definition: A benefit that is offered as a result of an accomplishment or an exhibited behavior
Monetary: Increased salary, bonus, and asset, etc.
Non-monetary: Prestige, fame, and importance, etc.

14. Performance Objective
Definition: An established goal which, when met, provides some value to the person or entity offering the benefit and also, possibly, to the person receiving the benefit.
While the behavior is not the central focus of the incentive, it is the desired outcome.

15. Safety Incentive Program
Roles:
Raise awareness of safety issues
Improve proactive behaviors
Create a long-lasting, safe working culture
Eliminate or Reduce negative behaviors

16. Safety Incentives in Construction
Three types:
Outcome based: To meet a specified outcome or level of performance
Behavior based: To exhibit certain behaviors
Activity based: To participate in sanctioned activities that relate to safety

17. Outcome-Based Safety Incentive
Also called injury/illness-based incentive
Relatively easy to implement and therefore common among construction companies
Some concerns:
Consistent with the duration over which the performance is measured
Not having injuries does not necessarily mean safe work behavior

18. Behavior-Based Safety Incentive
Comparatively difficult to measure and monitor because:
Employee behavior is complex and difficult to gauge. And,
Employee behavior changes constantly in reaction to external factors such as new facilities, new equipment, and new workgroups.

19. Behavior-Based Safety Incentive
It is assumed that safe behavior will lead to improved safety performance in terms of reduced injuries.
The award is given in consideration of the behavior’s potential impact on safety performance.

20. Activity-Based Safety Incentive
Example activities include:
Safety toolbox meetings
Safety training classes
Safety and health conferences
Generally easier to implement than behavior-based incentive.
It is assumed that there is a relationship between participation in certain activities and improved safety performance.

21. Types of Incentive Rewards
Gifts
Safety bucks
Recognition plaque
Distinguished Award
Etc.

22. Concerns about Safety Incentive
Whether safety incentive changes workers’ behavior consistently
The value of incentive: Make sure it is appropriate for the effort required to receive it
Injury underreporting
Expected behavior vs. extraordinary behavior: “Above and beyond”

23. Impact of Construction Safety Incentives
Previous research studies (Hinze, 2002; Goodrum and Gangwar, 2004) found that incentives are effective in improving many of the safety performance metrics used in construction. However,
Differences exist within the industry regarding perceptions of their effectiveness (Goodrum and Gangwar, 2004).
Hinze, J. (2002) Safety incentives: do they reduce injuries? Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction. 7:2, 81–84.
Goodrum, P.M. and Gangwar, M. (2004) Safety incentives: A study of their effectiveness in construction. Professional Safety. July,

24. Summary: Safety Incentive
Safety incentive should be part of an overall comprehensive SH&E program that not only involves workplace training but also engineers safety into the construction process. (Goodrum and Gangwar, 2004)
What Do You Think?