Safety Knights

A boss is a boss. You must handle them correctly! I would understand why he/she wants a Lockout Permit? So, I would talk to him about his/her thinking and motives. If your lockouts are always routine and/or the same I see your point. But if they are not routine, complicated, and/or I need to drive the point home about lockout, I see his/her point.

I always include a from of a Lockout Permit in my Lockout Programs. I merely call it a "Hazardous Work Permit." Mine is to target those situations where for whatever reason and employee feels he cannot lockout in a lockout situation. Employees in the skilled trades feel they have so much technical knowledge and know much more than some "college boy safety wienie". This give them an out! Makes them feel they are part of the process.

Examples: First an electrician needs to test a machine with the power on and all the guards (doors) open on the electrical panel with live circuits exposed. Second, a machine repairman feels he can remove a hydraulic pump quickly, and does not need to do a full lock out.

So my logic to them is this. #1 Their boss and I are charged with the responsibility to keep them safe! #2 If they do not lockout they are risking several hundred thousand dollars of the companies
resources because of their potential injury. No one has the authority to take that kind of risk on their own! Their boss and I have the right to be involved (yes - approve) in that decision and approve taking that kind of risk. #3 Part of the permit is for you to tell us how you will keep yourself and others safe to the degree of approaching lockout or guarding and accept the risk for the remainder.

I tell them that they if they feel they do not need to lockout they have a way to tell us why and how they will remain safe. If they should take the chance an not follow company policy I will not hesitate to terminate their employment! (And I have had to to that in a few situations).

No, it's not, most companies use them as part of their compliance process. Meaning, they use them as a checklist prior to start to make sure the ABC is done, reviewed and signed off. Given the risk, its a good practice. A good permit is a summary of the long ECP. Ideally, the employee doing the work should know the ECP and use the permit to ensure the high notes are hit before he/she starts the work. Redundancy for a safety manager is his friend, provided it's not an additional burden to operations especially considering it's a high risk activity. No one reads the ECP either because they do it all the time or they are rebellious. Human nature being what it is, that permit could save your job and someone's life. It's a macro level checklist to ensure its safe like a confined space permit that represents a micro (and often long) ECP. Sometimes we need to coach operations that limited redundancy is best when it's high risk for their safety and your ability to provide for your family. That's my advice. I once saved a company 285,000 dollars because I had a sub sign a redundant excavation permit before they hit USAF Spec OPs fiber cable line in Fort Walton Beach Florida. He penciled whipped it, but we followed that annoying policy. The sub hit the line and paid for the repair because I had the paperwork. Given the total story which I won't type, had I not done it, the USAF on the EUL project would have ate the cost my my company and it would've cost me my job. True Story. lol.

I haven't ever heard of a LOTO permit. However, maintenance procedures that are written and with a checklist SHOULD have a checklist that specifically addresses LOTO. Those procedures and checklists remain on the equipment (clear document holder) beside the control panel. Operators should not have to deal with permits, and instead limited to the Maintenance Department. Maybe I am missing something.