Nevada County Grand Jury
• 2002-2003
Town of Truckee Injury and Illness Prevention Program Reason for Investigation The Grand Jury, as an advocate for the
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 20 findings
F1
The Town of Truckee, incorporated in March 1993, is the largest of the three incorporated municipalities in Nevada County. In September 2001, the Town of Truckee established its own police department, thus significantly increasing its employee base.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
Truckee’s IIP Program was developed in 1996 three years after incorporation, and has not been updated as of this report. Truckee is working on updating its IIP Program manual with an expected completion date of mid 2003.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
Update, publish, and distribute the revised safety program manual to all employees The following web site may serve as a guideline for updating the manual: www.dir.ca.gov/dosh/dosh_publications/iipp.html.
F3
The grand jury was told that the Town Manager, who is the IIP Program Administrator, has identified employee safety as a priority.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
The IIP Program Administrator appointed the Assistant to the Town Manager to the position of Town Safety Officer. These safety duties comprise one of several significant functional areas of responsibility assigned to the Assistant to the Town’s Manager.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
The Safety Officer has participated in off-site training programs to become familiar with the role and responsibilities in this area. However, when asked, the Safety Officer was unable to identify the legislation that sets forth the requirements for employee safety/training programs and the respective record-keeping requirements.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
The Safety Officer is responsible for planning, coordinating, and ensuring that training is provided to the Town employees. The Administrative Services Director (combined risk manager/personnel director) is responsible for overseeing and managing the Town’s general liability and worker’s compensation risks/costs. The Administrative Services Director (ASD) also oversees new employee safety orientations, personnel files, and instructs department managers and supervisors in the proper evaluation of employee performance.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
While Truckee at one time had a safety committee, the committee has fallen into disuse. Staff interviewed could not say with certainty when that committee ceased to function, nor could they state the reason why. Staff was unable to identify which persons or positions previously were assigned to participate in that committee.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
Appoint staff from line, supervisor, and management levels to serve on the safety committee. Direct the committee to meet regularly to review new safety issues and safety performance, to make recommendations for improved safety, and to communicate this information to all employees. Empower the committee to develop a variety of methods for distributing safety brochures and related information to employees.
F8
Of all of the factors used in an employee’s performance evaluation, adherence to safety carries the most weight. Supervisors are also evaluated on meeting their responsibilities for ensuring employees are properly trained in the safe performance of their work.
No recommendations for this finding
F9
The Safety Officer, who has been with the Town for about 18 months, was unaware that safety is a factor in performance evaluations, although he has been expected to perform evaluations of his own staff during that period.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
The ASD stated that the Public Agency Risk Sharing Authority of California (PARSAC) issues an annual safety inspection report. The report is sent to the Town Manager. The information in the report has not been shared with the Safety Officer. The Safety Officer was unaware that such a report existed.
No recommendations for this finding
F11
Employees train their peers. However, no formal “training of the trainers” takes place.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
Strengthen safety training through a “training of the trainers” program initiated by the Safety Officer or the ASD.
F12
First Aid and CPR training is offered to all employees.
No recommendations for this finding
F13
All new employees are given a safety orientation. A signed acknowledgment of the completion of orientation and receipt of a copy of the safety manual is placed in the employee’s personnel file. The Safety Officer was unaware that these procedures are in place and could not recall receiving a safety orientation upon hire, due to the volume of information disseminated during new employee orientation.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Establish a safety orientation program for new employees that is separate from the general policies, procedures, and other orientation provided upon hire.
F14
Title 8 CCR Section 3203 of the General Industry Safety Orders defines record keeping requirements for safety and health training.
No recommendations for this finding
F15
The Safety Officer was unable to confirm if supervisors in the departments adhere to the record keeping requirements.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Ensure that safety-training record keeping complies with Title 8 CCR Section 3203 of the General Industry Safety Orders. The Safety Officer or other designated staff must conduct periodic audits of department safety records to ensure that these requirements are met.
F16
Worker Compensation claims history was not available.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
Require department personnel to implement quarterly safety meetings, and take attendance. Evaluate department heads on the safety performance record of their staff. Schedule makeup safety meetings when appropriate.
F17
As set forth in the IIP Program, department personnel are required to conduct quarterly safety meetings. Safety meetings for public works employees are conducted weekly in the “field.” Supervisors take attendance, but no make-up sessions are provided for those who miss the training. Periodic safety meetings for animal control staff have just begun. Facilities maintenance staff receives monthly instruction. Office and professional staff receive no regular or periodic safety training. The Safety Officer has not conducted any training sessions for his own staff.
No recommendations for this finding
F18
No safety incentives or recognition programs are in place. Employees are not provided quarterly or annual reports on their department’s safety record.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
Create employee safety incentive and recognition programs.
F19
Truckee has a variety of safety brochures for distribution to employees. However, the brochures have not been distributed and there is no system in place to make them available to the employees.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
Appoint staff from line, supervisor, and management levels to serve on the safety committee. Direct the committee to meet regularly to review new safety issues and safety performance, to make recommendations for improved safety, and to communicate this information to all employees. Empower the committee to develop a variety of methods for distributing safety brochures and related information to employees.
F20
Recently, while performing an inspection, a building inspector was seriously injured in a fall from a roof. CONCLUSIONS The original IIP Program appears to be a minimal response to meet state requirements following the incorporation of the Town of Truckee in 1993. Given the Town’s growth and the addition of a police department, an effective and comprehensive safety program is critical. Management has not demonstrated a strong commitment to all aspects of their IIP Program. The loss of the safety committee and the lack of sharing safety information could spell trouble for an agency that has experienced few serious employee injuries thanks more to luck than to adequate planning and prevention. The recent resignation of the ASD, who better understood the effects of employee safety on the Town’s bottom line, as well as its employee resources, further threatens the success of the safety program. Revisions to the IIP Program Manual are critical and need to be frequently reviewed if employee safety in the Town is to remain a priority. Assignment of the central Safety Officer duties to a key official in the Town Manager’s office suggests that employee safety was taken seriously at the top. In actuality, until serious injuries occur such as the recent injuries sustained by the building inspector, the Safety Officer would find it easier to focus on other more demanding tasks and issues. Without a centralized safety committee consisting of supervisors, managers, and line personnel, the idea that safety is a priority becomes nothing more than a well-intentioned thought that bears no fruit. There is only one employee (the Safety Officer) who has the task of ensuring the safety of the Town’s staff. If only some of the employees receive training some of the time, there could be disagreement among the employees that safety matters in the performance of their duties. Safety is currently only a footnote in the new orientation process for incoming employees. This is confirmed when employees do not recall that they received a safety orientation. The acknowledgment that employees signed only certifies that the Town is meeting its legal obligations, and does not necessarily have the needed impact. There appears to be a lack of awareness that safety is an important part of every employee’s duties and performance evaluations. Additional periodic training has not been provided to reinforce the importance of familiarity with and adherence to safety standards and practices. Communication and teamwork is not shared within and across departmental lines, as well as up and down the chain of command. Town employees who are responsible for training are not receiving the appropriate training.
No recommendations for this finding
Conclusions 1
-
CL1 Page 3The original IIP Program appears to be a minimal response to meet state requirements following the incorporation of the Town of Truckee in 1993. Given the Town’s growth and the addition of a police department, an effective and comprehensive safety program is critical. Management has not demonstrated a strong commitment to all aspects of their IIP Program. The loss of the safety committee and the lack of sharing safety information could spell trouble for an agency that has experienced few serious employee injuries thanks more to luck than to adequate planning and prevention. The recent resignation of the ASD, who better understood the effects of employee safety on the Town’s bottom line, as well as its employee resources, further threatens the success of the safety program. Revisions to the IIP Program Manual are critical and need to be frequently reviewed if employee safety in the Town is to remain a priority. Assignment of the central Safety Officer duties to a key official in the Town Manager’s office suggests that employee safety was taken seriously at the top. In actuality, until serious injuries occur such as the recent injuries sustained by the building inspector, the Safety Officer would find it easier to focus on other more demanding tasks and issues. Without a centralized safety committee consisting of supervisors, managers, and line personnel, the idea that safety is a priority becomes nothing more than a well-intentioned thought that bears no fruit. There is only one employee (the Safety Officer) who has the task of ensuring the safety of the Town’s staff. If only some of the employees receive training some of the time, there could be disagreement among the employees that safety matters in the performance of their duties. Safety is currently only a footnote in the new orientation process for incoming employees. This is confirmed when employees do not recall that they received a safety orientation. The acknowledgment that employees signed only certifies that the Town is meeting its legal obligations, and does not necessarily have the needed impact. There appears to be a lack of awareness that safety is an important part of every employee’s duties and performance evaluations. Additional periodic training has not been provided to reinforce the importance of familiarity with and adherence to safety standards and practices. Communication and teamwork is not shared within and across departmental lines, as well as up and down the chain of command. Town employees who are responsible for training are not receiving the appropriate training.
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Truckee
City