Investigation on the Nature of Safety Rule Violations in High-Rise Construction Projects

Abstract

The construction sector has consistently demonstrated a greater risk of fatal and non-fatal occupational accidents than other economic sectors, particularly with respect to high-rise building construction projects. Despite searing progress in the regulatory domain, and progressive formulation of new safety agenda for the industry, the truth is safety incidences involving fatalities and injuries still perpetuate with varying degrees of intensity. This is further aggravated by the loss of vital project resources of materials, equipment, and labours, which is counter-productive, unsustainable, and occasionally polluting. What is abundantly clear is that human factor when dealing with safety intricacies and observation still plays a considerable role in determining key safety objective accomplishment. With that in mind, it was the aims of this study to delve deeper into this issue among practitioners at the forefront of the high-rise building construction works in Malaysia. Specifically, it investigates, analyses, and ranks the degree of severity of the safety rule violation repercussion, the frequency, and perpetrators. A questionnaire survey approach was devised and distributed to respondents from among the developers, consultants, contractors, and relevant authorities. The data collected were analysed using SPSS package by determining the average index, standard deviation, variance, and frequency analysis. The results have shown that the lack of fire protection was perceived to lead to the most severe repercussion, while the lack of risky, near-miss, accident reporting, and the lack of Logout or Tagout (LOTO) procedures during servicing and maintenance activities were the most frequent safety rule violations. In addition, the contractor party was the most regular offender of the safety regulations, understandably by virtue of numbers. In conclusion, these outcomes could facilitate safety authorities and professionals in devising pragmatic schemes that best utilize both the persuasive and punitive mitigation measures for better safety outcomes.