Discuss the reasons why some employees in some organizations do not report accidents and near misses and discuss ways that these organizations could improve their levels of reporting.

Unreported accidents and near misses have ramifications for individual employees, organizations, and society. Unreported accidents can lead to untreated occupational injuries and illnesses. Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), the most common type of occupational illness, affect muscles, ligaments, tendons, nerves, and other soft tissues and joints (Health & Safety Executive, 2003). Acute MSD symptoms occur when pain or loss and restriction of movement are caused by a specific event. Gradual or chronic symptoms may continue or recur over an employee’s lifetime and could result in permanent disability. Initially, the employee’s abilities to perform certain tasks or jobs may be compromised. Long-term, MSDs may adversely affect and employee’s entire life, not just his work (Health & Safety Executive, 2006).
MSDs also have consequences for organizations and society. In the UK, more than one million people suffer from work-related MSDs, which account for about 48 percent of reported ill health (Health & Safety Executive, 2006). MSDs caused each employee to be absent roughly 20 days annually, resulting in 12.3 million lost working days (Health & Safety Executive, 2004). According to the Health & Safety Executive (2006), MSDs cost society £5.7 billion annually (1995 prices).
Most importantly, unreported accidents fail to signal safety professionals and management that there may be issues with products, processes, or the overall workplace. When hazards and risks are not identified, precautions and procedures cannot be implemented to prevent additional accidents, injuries, and deaths.
Employees may not report accidents or near misses to health and safety professionals or management within their organization for several reasons. The safety climate and culture of the organization may not be conducive to accident reporting. Employees may have been given inadequate training regarding safe practices and procedures, information about risks and accidents, or opportunities to report accidents and near misses. In some cases, employees just may not view safety as important or be interested in reporting accidents. The factors contributing to poor levels of reporting are compounded for low and middle-income developing countries, like Kazakhstan, which comprise about 79 percent of the world’s population (Fischer, 2001). There are also socioeconomic and political issues connected to workplace health and safety. This essay explores the reasons why some employees in some organizations do not report accidents and near misses and offers recommendations for how these organizations could improve their levels of reporting.
A primary deterrent to accident and near miss reporting by employees is an unsupportive safety climate or organizational culture. According to Varnonen and Mattile (2000), ‘Employees continuously observe their work environment and the actions of their fellow workers and superiors, and they use such observations as a basis for the creation of cognitive models associated with safety. These models regulate their actions in the workplace and thus have an influence on safety’ (p. 761). These conscious and unconscious actions, behaviors, and perceptions towards constitute the safety climate (Fullarton & Stokes, 2007). The safety culture is a more long-term, definitive regard for safety as evidenced by visible management commitment to safety and established policies and procedures for safety. However, safety climate and culture are interrelated. Research has shown that general organizational culture significantly impacts safety climate (Fullarton & Stokes, 2007).
The safety climate has been found to have an affect on the safety level of the work environment and the safety practices of the organization (Varonen & Mattile, 2000). The safety culture, including the organization’s attitudes to safety and its safety precautions, has also been correlated to accident reporting and rates (Varonen & Mattile, 2000; Fullarton & Stokes, 2007). In other words, organizations with better safety climates and cultures have been shown to have higher levels of reporting and lower accident rates. According to Huang et al. (2006), ‘safety climate is a critical factor predicting the history of self-reported occupational injury, and that employee safety control [through reporting] mediates the relationship between safety climate and occupational injury’ (p. 425).
Conversely, organizations with poor safety climates and culture hinder safety performance by employees and may have lower levels of reporting. For example, if employees think they may be chastised or even dismissed for accidents, they will not report them. Alternatively, in an organization in which safety is valued and employees that voluntarily make use of safe practices are praised and rewarded, employees know that they should exceed the health and safety requirements to be successful even though the management has not explicitly stated it. When there are no codified organizational policies, procedures, and goals regarding safety, employees may assume that it is not important. When they see their coworkers violating safety regulations or compliance not being enforced, they assume workplace safety is not important. If the organization has not invested in personal protective equipment or training for employees, they may assume that safety is not valued. These situations lead employees to consider accident and near miss reporting as inconsequential to their jobs and workplaces, so they do not report the accidents or near misses.
Employees also may not report accidents or near misses because they have received inadequate training and information about workplace hazards, proper safety procedures, or their reporting options. The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulation 1999 (the Management Regulations) provide a foundation for employers’ duties under the Health and Safety at Work Act (Health & Safety Executive, 2003). However, the way in which these obligations are fulfilled is up to the discretion of the employer or organization. There are not always established standards for each responsibility or every industry, raising a number of issues about the requirements and leading to inconsistencies in the information employees are given about health and safety. A risk assessment must be performed but its format and level of detail are not specified. Are risk assessments to be performed for the just the entire workplace or to include major work functions? The findings of the assessment must be recorded, but they do not have to be shared with employees. Health and safety measures must be implemented but the regulations do not require monitoring or auditing. ‘Competent’ people should be implementing measures but there are no qualifications for education, professional training, or certification. The information and training provided to employees should be ‘clear’ but there are no definitions or rules for who decides whether the information and training are ‘clear.’
These ambiguities in the workplace health and safety requirements often lead to employee non-reported accidents or near misses. Employees may not be aware of the hazards in their workplace and, therefore, may self-prioritize accidents. They may assume that only major accidents should be reported and may have no understanding of the ‘near miss’ concept. Employees may not be aware of the appropriate organizational channels for reporting accidents or near misses. Reporting may be as informal as mentioning an incident to the shift supervisor or as formal as completing an incident report as part of an accident and injury auditing process. In many developing countries, inadequate information about workplace hazards thwarts effective prevention of occupational illnesses like MSDs (Christiani et al., 1990). Because organizations do not have the information to diagnosis occupational illnesses, minor injuries caused by accidents may develop into serious illnesses, especially if the accident goes unreported (Bedrikow et al., 1997).
Another reason that employees may not report accidents or near misses is that they are simply disinterested. According to Gryzbeck (1979),
‘If employees are actively involved and interested during training sessions on writing incident reports, they are likely to retain and apply much of the information that is presented. In addition, their understanding of the importance of the incident report will be enhanced’ (Gryzbeck, 1979, p. 97).
Conversely, employees not engaged in health and safety management processes are less likely to report accidents and near misses. Griffin andz Neal (2000) confirmed that motivation influenced employee reports of safety performance and also affected the workplace safety climate.
The problem of unreported accidents and near misses is especially prevalent in developing countries where health and safety is tied to a myriad of concerns to which developed countries are less susceptible. Because of globalization and technological advances, industrial activity has increased dramatically in to the past two decades in developing countries (Christiani et al., 1990). New industries and technology have brought new hazards into the workplace. Persons in developing countries usually work under more physically taxing, personally dangerous, and environmentally unhealthy conditions than persons in developed countries (Fischer, 2001). Working conditions for most employees do not meet the minimum standards set by international agencies such as the United Nations, International Labor Organization, or World Health Organization (LaDou, 2003). Furthermore, according to Ong et al. (1993),
‘The principles of occupational health may be the same in the developed and developing countries. However, there can be a wide diversity in practice. The exposure to chemicals at the workplace in developing countries is usually of a different nature, and the level of exposure is generally of a higher magnitude. The leading occupational diseases in developing countries are also very different to those reported in industrialized nations. For hazard evaluation in developing countries, more factors need to be considered. Problems are usually more complicated as most workplaces are subjected to many factors, which typify small-scale industries’ (Ong et al., 1993, p. 112).
New health risks augment the existing health problems of vulnerable populations and strain the deficient health care system of developing countries. In most developing countries, there are complex socioeconomic and political issues at play.
Socioeconomically, developing countries struggle with widespread poverty, resources that are limited in quantity and utility, and exponential population growth (Vargas, 1988). These issues trickle down to affect individual workers decisions of whether to report accidents. High levels of chronic employment provide a labor force ready to replace workers that created ‘problems’ on the job. Employees may not report accidents or near misses for fear of losing employment or suffering income declines (Becker & Merkuryeva, 2003). Depending on the country’s laws and bureaucracy, workers may not be to obtain disability support if hurt on the job, therefore they do not report accidents and continue working with injuries or illnesses. For example, in Brazil in the 1970s, changes in the social security laws discouraged registration and reporting of occupation injuries and diseases resulting in an increase in unreported accidents and death rates (Bedrikow, 1997).
From the employer’s perspective, organizational necessities must be prioritized and health and safety often loses. In developing countries, manpower is abundant, but capital (money) and skilled labors are scarce (Vargas, 1988). The lack of capital and on-going investment requires cutbacks in ‘marginally necessary’ expenses like health and safety (Ong et al., 1993). For instance, employees of Tanzania’s welding, spray painting, woodwork, and metalwork industries reported in needing permanent workplaces and water and sanitation as well as personal protective equipment (Rongo et al., 2004). The tradeoffs for these workers were fairly extreme: either you have drinking water and a place to use the bathroom or safety equipment.
Because of issues associated with population density and distribution in relation to available health and safety resources, employees may not deem it necessary to report accidents or near misses because they will not receive treatment for them. Developing countries are heavily rural, especially if there are large indigenous populations or ethnic tribes. Health and safety assistance, training, and medical care are often concentrated in the most populated areas, the cities (Bedrikow, 1997). Uneven distribution of assistance and care leads to a two-fold problem affecting the entire population: rural areas cannot receive care and urban areas are overcrowded and cannot receive adequate care.
Politically, developing countries often lack the capacity or will to implement and enforce health and safety regulations. First, there is a dearth of information concerning occupational health in developing countries. For many countries, it is a ‘vast new field’ without the appropriate higher education programs to prepare workplace health and safety professionals or researchers to study problems unique to developing areas (Bedrikow et al., 1997). Because of the limited research, legislation has not been produced to the level of that of developed countries. As the understanding of workplace safety and occupation related injuries have grown in the UK, legislation has been developed to ensure safety practices are adhered to in the workplace. A variety of legislation and regulations have been enacted, including the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, to protect the health, safety, and welfare of employees (Health & Safety Executive, 2003). Because of constant civil unrest and political instability, many developing countries lack the basic legislative framework for workplace health and safety management (Ahasan & Partanen, 2001). Occupational health and safety laws only cover about 10 percent of the populations in developing countries (LaDou, 2003). They also ‘lack the political mechanisms to translate scientific findings into effective policies’ (Nuwayhid, 2004, p. 1916).
Moreover, developing countries may lack the institutional capacity to implement work regulations and labor legislation (Ahasan & Partanen, 2001). In the UK, the Health and Safety Commission and its ‘operating arm,’ the Executive, regulate these laws. The Health and Safety Executive’s goal is ‘to protect the health, safety, and welfare of employees, and to safeguard others, principally the public, who may be exposed to risks from work activity’ (Health & Safety Executive, 2003, p. 4). While most countries do have a sort of ministry of health, these agencies may not be specifically mandated to implement and enforce health and safety policy. Rantanen et al. (2004) revealed that only about 15 percent of workers in developing countries have access to health and safety services (p. 63).
Furthermore, health and safety programs are almost exclusively concentrated on large organizations and industries (McCann, 1996). Many developing countries have informal sectors that contribute to the national economy. Informal or cottage industries, such as pottery, food stalls, jewelry, weaving, and woodworking, are not officially recognized by the government and may be neglected if there are limited health and safety management resources. This neglect is especially harmful to the employees of cottage industries because studies have found that smaller organizations are more likely to have higher incidence of injuries (Fullarton & Stokes, 2007). In fact, smaller organizational size has been a predictor of greater injury frequency (Fullarton & Stokes, 2007).
Kazakhstan of the former Soviet Union is a prime example of the health and safety issues surrounding accident and near miss reporting in developing countries. Kazakhstan became an independent nation in 1991 with the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The new country was thrust from a Communist state into a market economy. Immediately, demand and production collapsed, formal sector employment fell, inflation skyrocketed to 3000 percent, and the gross domestic product decreased by 11.3 percent (Becker et al., 2003). Mortality increased by more than 103 percent, due in large part to a spike in the numbers of accidents, injuries, and traumas.
Studies by Becker et al. (2003) show that the industrial production became associated with greater environmental damages and job related accidents and mortality. Reporting levels for accidents and near misses hit a dramatic low. The collapsed economy forced many workers into industrial organizations and high unemployment coupled with astronomical inflation increased the pressure to maintain existing employment. In addition, organizations could avoid health and safety practices or procedures that would compromise their financial stability. Becker et al. (2003) attribute high accident and death rates to ‘Soviet-era disregard for the health consequences of plant location and environmental damage, as well as poor occupational safety practices’ (p. 9). As in other developing countries, a number of socioeconomic and political factors contributed to low levels of accident reporting and a corresponding increase in injuries and mortality in Kazakhstan.
Employees do not report accidents and near misses for three broad reasons. First, the safety climate and organizational culture discourage or penalize employees for having or reporting accidents and near misses. Second, employees are provided with inadequate information and training regarding workplace safety practices, incident reporting, or occupational illnesses. Lastly, the employees are not interested in or motivated to report incidents. Correspondingly, the following recommendations are offered for how organizations can improve their level of reporting:

1. Create a supportive safety environment. Studies have shown that management commitment to safety, return-to-work policies, post-injury administration, and safety training are important dimensions of safety climate (Gryzbek, 1979; Huang et al., 2006; Fullarton & Stokes, 2007). Organizations should have established policies and procedures that codify the importance of employee health and safety. Management should be visibly committed to health and safety by speaking with employees about it regularly, being seen at training sessions, and having open discussion with supervisors encouraging safe work practices. Most importantly, the organization should be forgiving of employees that have near misses or accidents so that other employees will not be intimidated and avoid incident reporting.
2. Provide ongoing health and safety training. Health and safety regulations in the UK require the employer to provide training on tasks, equipment, and occupational health protection. It is to the employer’s benefit to provide this on a continuous basis for several reasons. First, employees will constantly be reminded that they should be using safe practice in the workplace and be kept abreast of the latest regulations, thereby improving the safe climate and encouraging employees to report accidents (Varonen & Mattile, 2000). In addition, providing extensive and ongoing information to employees about workplace health and safety can improve the practices they employ during daily tasks, increase their understanding of safety, and reduce workplace related injuries. Moreover, training engages employees in health and safety management, boosts interest, and encourages personal employee assessment (Gryzbek, 1979).
3. Consistently integrate employees into the health and safety management process. Different approaches should be tested to determine what works best for the organization (Gyi et al., 1999). One of the most effective ways to involve employees is through an incident reporting scheme. In a 2006 study, Nielsen et al. examined the relationship between incident rates, safety climate, and the willingness to report incidents at two industrial plants. Informal and formal procedures for incident reporting were created and discussed with employees. The successful incident reporting scheme was followed by increased levels of reporting, a decline in accidents and near misses, and an improved perception of the safety climate (Nielsen et al., 2006).
4. Organizations in developing countries should proactively create their own health and safety policies and procedures and create partnerships with other organizations and agencies to increase occupational health capacity (Rantanen et al., 2004). LaDou (2003) also suggests that developed nations ‘share the burden’ and offer experts, training, and consultation to developing areas. Long-term, developing countries must develop stable and effective legal and economic systems that value workers and support occupational health and safety.

However, there are disadvantages to implementing the proposed measures to improve employee level of reporting and the overall safety climate of the organization. Automation of tasks and ongoing training can be expensive, especially for smaller organizations. Lancaster et al. (2001) found that the cost per employee in UK organizations taking action to manage health and safety was £341 per employee for small organizations and £37 per employee for large organizations. The most expensive accident control measures linked to increasing the levels of accident reporting are changing work practices and purchasing new equipment (Lancaster et al., 2001). The least expensive measures are conducting risk assessments and reviewing assessments. Whatever the individual costs, these expenses are interrelated. For example, employees must be trained regarding new work practices or equipment. Once risk assessments have been conducted, the employer should take additional steps to avoid and reduce risks to employees.
For developing countries, the costs of increasing employee accident reporting are exponential. Occupational health is viewed as a relatively new field (Bedrikow et al., 1997). There are few professionals relative to the number of organizations needing their expertise, so employing or training a specialist specifically for an organization can be deemed an unnecessary or unreasonable expense (Ong et al., 1993; Ahasan & Partanen, 2001). Risk assessment requires at least some rudimentary training and, given the limited research available regarding workplace health and safety in developing countries, can be difficult to complete depending on the industry or workplace. Because of the limited financial resources of organizations in developing countries, the costs of new safety and personal protective equipment, which do not increase revenue, must be weighed against those of new machinery and supplies, which do increase revenue. Furthermore, the cost of equipment may be higher because it must be imported from developed countries. Therefore, organizations may be less likely to purchase safety equipment, which can demonstrate that management is not committed to safety and weaken the safety climate of the workplace (Varonen & Mattile, 2000).
Employee reporting of accidents and near misses is an often neglected aspect of occupational health and safety. Although it affects individuals, organizations, and society, accident reporting can also be symptomatic of an organization’s safety climate and culture or, as in the case of developing countries, other concerns plaguing the society.