Contractor Safety
Management Systems
An independent assessment of whether a contractor set up an adequate safety management system for the work, whether it was followed in practice, and how its performance compares with what a competent and experienced contractor would have done.
Paper Systems and Real Performance
Most contractors on large projects can produce an impressive set of HSE documents: a project HSE plan, procedures, risk registers, a permit-to-work system and an audit schedule. Disputes rarely turn on whether those documents existed. They turn on whether the system suited the hazards of the work, whether people on site actually followed it, and whether management acted when they did not.
Karim assesses both sides of that question. He identifies what the system required and then tests it against the project record: permits, inspection and audit records, incident reports, toolbox talks, meeting minutes, correspondence and witness evidence.
The benchmark is what a competent and experienced contractor could reasonably have been expected to do in the circumstances, measured against the contract, the contractor's own plans and recognised industry practice. Hindsight is identified and set aside.
Disputes Where This Assessment Helps
- A client alleges a contractor repeatedly breached the project HSE requirements
- Termination or suspension for safety default is disputed
- A contractor claims time or cost for a safety stand-down imposed by the client
- A serious incident has occurred and responsibility between the parties is contested
- Back-charges or withheld payments are linked to safety performance
- Responsibility for subcontractor safety performance is in dispute
How the Assessment Is Done
A structured review that separates what the system said from what actually happened on site.
-
Requirements
Identify the safety obligations that applied: the contract HSE requirements, approved HSE plans and procedures, applicable laws and relevant standards.
-
System Design
Assess whether the system was suitable for the hazards and scale of the work, including risk assessment, competence, supervision and emergency arrangements.
-
Implementation
Test whether the system was followed in practice, using permits, inspection and audit records, incident reports, photographs and witness evidence.
-
Monitoring and Response
Examine how audit findings, non-conformances, warnings and earlier incidents were tracked, closed out and escalated to management.
-
Comparison
Compare the contractor's performance with what a competent and experienced contractor would have done, and explain the significance of each departure.
-
Opinion
Set out clear findings on each issue, the evidence behind them and the limits of what the record can show.
Elements of the Safety Management System
These are the elements most often in issue. The scope of each assessment follows the questions in the instructions.
Whether safety leadership, HSE staffing and supervision levels matched the risk profile of the work and the contract requirements.
Prequalification, induction, bridging documents, monitoring of subcontractor work and action taken on poor performance.
Whether workers and supervisors held the qualifications, training and experience required for the tasks they actually performed.
Whether permits and isolations were planned, authorised, verified and closed out properly, including where several contractors worked on the same systems.
The quality of task risk assessments and method statements, and whether controls were chosen using the hierarchy of controls.
Whether inspections and audits were carried out as planned, findings were acted on and repeat issues were escalated.
What Performance Is Measured Against
The benchmarks depend on the project, the contract and where the work was done. They commonly include:
- Contract HSE requirements, such as FIDIC Sub-Clauses 4.8 and 6.7 or bespoke EPC provisions
- The contractor's approved HSE plan, procedures and bridging documents
- Health and safety laws of the country where the work was carried out
- ISO 45001, including its requirements for controlling contractors (clause 8.1.4.2)
- Industry guidance, such as IOGP Report 423 on HSE management in a contract environment
- Manufacturer instructions and relevant technical standards
Linked Services
Where the dispute centres on a particular event, this assessment is often combined with a serious incident analysis. For energy and infrastructure projects, see energy and infrastructure project safety.
For Australian workplace injury and public liability matters under the WHS laws, see Contractor WHS System Review and Contractor Management Expert Witness.
- Independent expert report
- Schedule of departures from the required standard, referenced to the evidence
- Reply report on the opposing expert's assessment
- Joint statement and oral evidence where required
-
Is an ISO 45001 certificate enough to show an adequate system?
No. Certification shows that a system met the standard when it was audited, usually on a sample basis. It does not show that the system was implemented on a particular project, at a particular time, for a particular task. The project record has to be examined.
-
How do you deal with gaps in the documents?
Gaps are identified and their significance explained. Missing records can be evidence in themselves, for example where a permit system required records that cannot be produced. Where an opinion depends on a disputed fact, Karim sets out the alternatives rather than filling the gap with assumption.
-
Can you also assess the client's role?
Yes, where the instructions ask for it. Clients often set the HSE requirements, approve plans, carry out audits and control site interfaces, so their role can be relevant to how the contractor's performance should be judged.
-
What documents do you need?
Typically the contract HSE provisions, the HSE plan and procedures, risk assessments and method statements, permits, inspection and audit reports, incident reports, HSE statistics, meeting minutes, correspondence about safety performance and witness statements.
-
Do you apply hindsight?
No. Performance is judged on what was known or reasonably knowable at the time. Where an issue only became apparent after the event, the report says so.
Assess a Contractor's Safety Performance
Email Karim at Karim@safetydeeds.com to discuss the issues, the documents available and the timetable.