Safety Jack

I hope that you all had a safe and happy summer. I also hope your “summer” was longer than mine. This is just over a year for the Safety Jack column, and at the annual working lunch meeting of the CSEG Publications Committee, held in the CSEG Board Room on June 22, there was no motion to cancel yours truly. Rather there was an endorsement to get more controversial if the subject warranted it, but a caution not to get too personal.

I have no intention of naming people or companies specifically for criticism, but “if the shoe fits, wear it,” as the saying goes.

Our industry has long been suspected (known) as one of hard work and hard play. Along with that hard play comes an acknowledgement of what is known today as substance abuse. Long lunches supported by multi-mixed beverages as well as many long evenings spent shooting many miles of line fortified with many more beverages.

Yes it was true, records shot in the field were many times surpassed only by the record shots consumed in the bar.

I recently had a conversation with Bill Kammermayer, President of the Canadian Association of Geophysical Contractors (CAGe). Bill stated that he has noted a tremendous change in the habits of most industry “lunchers” who seldom include alcohol in these business buffets. I too note that there is rarely an alcoholic beverage in the business meals that I attend.

What better way to set examples for our employees than to abstain ourselves during a working day.

I questioned Bill about the CAGC members’ attitude towards Substance Abuse Programs. Apparently not too long ago, about half of the members questioned denied that there was a substance abuse problem in our industry. Might you say we had an ostrich or two in our midst?

The CAGC put on a seminar hosted by a local drug abuse program company. The seminar was attended by fewer than anticipated but was well received by all who did. There is some thought of having a repeat seminar as there was most surely a benefit from the first one. I would personally encourage more such seminars. A repeated message will do as much for management as for employees.

One question Bill is asking now of members (who are reportedly all in favour of some form of substance abuse program) is should the CAGC set up some form of minimum standard for a substance abuse policy for its members?

Bill advises that those polled to date are split on their feelings. Half have indicated a desire to go their own way with a program.

Regardless of how they are done, substance abuse programs are the norm today. Clients are a lot quicker to support this type of program than they were to support the general safety program five years ago. Substance abuse programs are becoming a requirement for being considered as an approved contractor, or even to bid on jobs.

When the first intentions of drug and alcohol control were voiced, some people said it would never work. “You will lose most or all of your employees.” “You won’t be able to keep a crew in the field.” Those and others were statements made in our industry.

WRONG!

I am going to blow the horn for my employer (who shall remain nameless). We introduced a substance abuse policy which became effective June 1, 1993. All employees were notified over three months in advance of this date.

In a nutshell, the policy requires all present employees and all applicants to agree to a test. Prospective employees who test positive are not considered for employment. Present employees who test positive are given confidential private interviews. If the employee wishes help to cure their problem, the company assists in this. If the cure is successful, the employee is returned to work with no loss of position.

Thanks to our Manager of Employee Relations, Doug Newman, and with the help of the Safety Department, our Substance Abuse Program is alive and well and has proven more successful than we anticipated. Of 110 employees tested, only four tested positive and all of those asked for and are obtaining help. I consider this a 100% success, not a 3% failure.

What are the benefits of these so called costly programs recently being considered by our industry?

• Employees are more comfortable working with peers who are in control
• of their faculties.
• Employees are developing more pride in their accomplishments.
• Employees are happy knowing that the risks associated with their work are greatly reduced.
• Employers are pleased with the knowledge that instruction and training is being received with a clear, open mind.
• Employers are more confident that expensive, high-tech equipment is being treated with the clear mentality required to optimize its potential.
• Employers are confident that safety is being better understood as a way of life.
• Clients can have the confidence that they are going to get the best possible return for their dollar invested.
• Parents and other family members can now look at the seismic industry as a place for their young people to work, where bad influences are reduced to an absolute minimum, where their sons and daughters can experience travel, healthy outdoor work, good pay and for the truly ambitious types, an opportunity for advancement in a truly unique industry.

If that sounds like a pitch for employment applications as a doodlebug, you are right, it is!

Our industry has the health, welfare and safety of its employees foremost in its plans and we need more good people to promote.

’Till next time, Live Safely.