The analysis of the findings thus far informs that there are some issues that have not been provided or have not been set out clearly in the WHSS. These are specifically on the goals and methods to achieve them, capability of the stakeholders and the factors affecting clients and coalitions.
These would be discussed guided by the 5C protocol of Najam. Figure 2 shows the five critical variables that are interlinked and each influencing one another at varying degrees (Najam, 1995).
Figure 2. The 5C Protocol (Najam,1995)
The content of the WHSS specifically on the goals and the methods to achieve them could still be improved. The WHSS seeks to direct efforts on the five priority sectors because of the high rates in those sectors. However, data also showed that some regions in the country have more significant fatalities and injuries compared to the remaining regions. Thus, the goal could further be narrowed down to these areas considering the resources to be expended in the implementation of the Strategy. The goal is specific to be achieved in three years by partnership and collaboration.
However, its implementation is in the context of the existing procedures e.g. the enforcement regulatory program of DOL. This is a source of threat that could hinder cooperation and effective collaboration. Moreover, firms have already safety systems and practices in placed directed towards compliance to the standards. A scheme to manage this would be that DOL applies a moratorium on random inspections among those firms that are signatories to the sectoral action plan. This is to give the WHSS a place and time to take its role in the firm’s systems and practices. This also serves as an incentive to actively engage in the WHSS. However, those firms that do not participate in the Strategy’s program could still be placed under the inspection activities of DOL.
The Strategy is implemented by DOL which regularly evaluates its progress. Najam (1995) suggested that one initiative that can be taken to ensure commitment of lower level implementer is on content and design of the evaluation process. The Strategy has an evaluation tool but absent of provision for direct and clear accountability in carrying out the agenda. The Council can serve as an oversight but as the review disclosed, the Council’s role in relation to the Strategy has not been fully realized. This may be because the council was established in 2007 as more of a compliance with the ILO convention 155.8 The question still remains for the need of a steering committee throughout the process to ensure that activities and directions are where it should be.
The WHSS targets to build capabilities of stakeholders by training of representatives and establishing professional alliances. However, the success of the implementation also significantly rests on the capacity of the implementing agents. The Strategy, as a project task could mean additional work and/or programs to be implemented by agency personnel. The WHSS’ policy actions also use “information and social marketing where the key to promote good social outcomes is the quality of information and effectiveness of its presentation” (Mintrom, 2012). Thus, it is also important to provide resources in terms of budget and capacity building of the agency implementers.
The Strategy seeks active participation of all stakeholders involved. It espouses that employers have the primary responsibility for the WHSS while employees have some responsibility in how they act in the workplace. How does the active participation of both workers and employers be achieved aside from partnership and collaboration? What is the link of the WHSS to the workplace? The reporting of the cases of incidents in the workplace is by notification. As earlier discussed, reporting may not be full and complete with the possibility of exposure to investigations and prosecutions. DOL’s September 2005 report on employers’ reporting of workplace health and safety practices showed low to moderate levels of reporting.9 This is also consistent with Brown and Butcher (2005) study which found that reports of occupational health and safety by organizations in New Zealand “need improvements in terms of completeness, consistency, verifiability and comparability” (Brown and Butcher 2005). A capability intervention in terms of reporting systems can be agreed by stakeholders and introduced in the action plan which would also serve as a feedback mechanism on how the Strategy is implemented.
Moreover, the target of the Strategy involves the active participation of workers. The deficiency of the HSE Act, if there is, is the lack of sufficient requirements to involve all those actors in the workforce (Slappendel 1995). With this development, it is thus logical to look at workplace health and safety from the perceptions of workers. Dew et al. (2005) studied three different work sites in New Zealand including a small factory by conducting interviews and focus groups with the workers. The research study which investigated presenteeism, a concept to describe working through illness and injury provided an insight into the working conditions of these groups of workers who described them as miserable and the environment noisy and dangerous (Dew, Keefe et al. 2005). The study’s findings suggested that changes to improve workplace health and safety can only have a limited effect due to the social and economic pressures faced by workers and their resigned acceptance to less than desirable workplaces. This was also pointed out by the study of Chu et al. (1997) that there are direct and indirect determinants of workers’ health. They are the structural, environmental, organizational and individual’s factors in the work setting and in the community (Chu, Driscoll et al. 1997).
This finding emphasizes the need for integrated management systems. It is noteworthy that the Strategy seeks to integrate health and safety in the organization’s culture. The commitment of the firms can best be manifested by the existence of a holistic health and safety management systems. Chu and Dwyer, (2002) reviewed the role of employers in workplace health management. They found that employers need to be agents of change and leaders adopting proactive approach in the development of company health and safety policies (Chu and Dwyer 2002). The employer could serve as the link of the Strategy towards an active participation of workers. The Strategy’s collaborating and partnering approach can be replicated by employers to their workers. This could enhance a cooperative and supportive environment for workplace health and safety, and ultimately acceptance of the action plans by the workers. A supportive environment can achieve a safe workplace and increases motivation of workers (Morgeson, Nahrgang et al. 2011). “Interventions focused on improving management commitment to safety may meaningfully enhance safety performance and reduce accidents (Christian, Wallace et al. 2009).
In sum, the WHSS is focused more on the interactions of content, capacity and clients and coalitions. There is a need to look into the critical variables of commitment and context because as Najam pointed out, all variables interlink that shape and influence the implementation of the Strategy. However, at the very least, DOL can identify variables which are directly under its control. Bayrakal (1995): p. 140), “ By fixing variable clusters that can be directly controlled, changes in those variable clusters that cannot be directly controlled maybe induced.”