Standard Guide for Recording Priority Occupational Injuries and Illnesses and Serious Injury or Fatality (SIF)-Related Serious Injuries/Illnesses and Fatalities

Importancia y uso:

4.1 In this guide, work-related injuries and illnesses are defined in a clear, measurable manner to facilitate consistent application across countries. This guide can be used during implementation of occupational health and safety management systems standards such as ISO 45001, ISO 45004, ANSI/ASSP Z10.0, and ANSI/ASSP Z16.1. The collected data will support the evaluation, comparison, and continuous improvement of management systems and processes focused on worker safety and health, including the identification and prevention of serious injuries/illnesses and fatalities. While incidents may vary in severity, the primary objective is to identify cases with significant connection to work with potential for severe consequences offering valuable insights for prevention. The resulting data and incidence rates will contribute to more consistent global benchmarking. The following levels (Fig. 1) and associated criteria have been established to classify incidents.

4.1.1 Level One Incidents (Benchmarkable)—These incidents qualify as aSIF cases as they have a clear workplace connection and result in life-ending, life-threatening, or life-altering consequences. This level of incident is designed to be benchmarkable, meaning it is structured and standardized to enable meaningful comparisons across organizations, industries, and time periods.

4.1.2 Level Two Incidents (Benchmarkable)—While these incidents do not qualify as aSIF cases, they are classified as “priority injury/illness” because of their clear workplace connection and significant consequences. Data from priority injury/illness incidents should be elevated as key performance indicators (KPIs) to drive continuous improvement in workplace safety programs. Because of the severity of these cases, worker discretion in reporting is typically limited, ensuring transparency and accurate incident management. This level of incident is designed to be benchmarkable, meaning it is structured and standardized to enable meaningful comparisons across organizations, industries, and time periods.

4.1.3 Level Three Incidents (Nonmandatory)—These cases are typically required to be recorded to ensure compliance with relevant federal, state, provincial, or local laws and regulations across various jurisdictions. While reporting these cases is not mandatory under this guide, it is likely to remain compulsory in many jurisdictions.

4.1.4 Level Four Incidents (Nonmandatory)—These cases do not meet the severity of Level One, Level Two, or Level Three incidents and typically include relatively minor injuries and illnesses, such as first aid cases, as well as near-miss incidents.

4.1.5 pSIF—These incidents have not resulted in an aSIF as defined in this guide. However, they are determined to have a clear workplace connection and the likelihood of it resulting in life-ending, life-threatening, or life-altering consequences. Please note that any of the previously defined incident levels (2 through 4) may be classified as a pSIF if the circumstances would likely have resulted in a serious injury or fatality were it not for specific safeguards or countermeasures. The number or rate of pSIF incidents is not designed to be benchmarkable, as comparison across organizations, industries, and time periods tends to negatively impact their reporting when encouraging more reporting is the desired outcome.

4.1.5.1 Identifying and addressing pSIF events enables organizations to prevent serious incidents proactively by focusing on hazards before they lead to actual harm. Encouraging the identification and reporting of pSIFs is essential to improving workplace safety.

4.1.5.2 pSIF identification supports the effective assessment of whether safeguards are properly implemented and followed. A key principle in evaluating the potential impact of a pSIF is determining whether safeguards were in place and effectively mitigated the severity and/or likelihood of the event, potentially preventing it from escalating into an aSIF.

4.1.5.3 The ideal safety condition is one in which workers are protected from hazardous energy through targeted, properly installed, and verified safeguards that eliminate or mitigate high-energy exposure, even in cases in which human error occurs. Since successful safeguard implementation is observable, such cases should be identified and analyzed to assess whether the safeguards are adequate and well maintained.

4.1.5.4 If safeguards are absent, ineffective, not followed, or fail to perform as intended leaving the risk of serious injury or fatality unaddressed, corrective actions shall be taken to prevent future occurrences.

4.1.6 SIFRisk—This level does not involve an actual incident. Instead, it captures conditions or constraints created by systems and processes that are likely to have the energy or potential to result in an aSIF. SIFRisk will eventually result in a serious or fatal injury/illness if allowed to continue. Evaluating identified SIF risks is crucial for preventing future SIF incidents.

Subcomité:

E34.80

Volúmen:

11.03

Número ICS:

13.100 (Occupational safety. Industrial hygiene), 35.240.80 (IT applications in health care technology)

Palabras clave:

fatality; illnesses; injuries; occupational; recording; SIF;