At one time in the maintenance world, the modus operandi was to react to downtime by fixing what broke. A common refrain from this era was, “If it ain't broke, don’t fix it.” This didn’t stop downtime from occurring, however. No matter how good people got at fixing things, they were always behind the proverbial eight ball from the start.

Improvement came with performing scheduled “micro repairs” based on usage time or calendar time. Replacements, adjustments, and lubrication ahead of failure dramatically reduced the failure rate, but it was expensive and introduced human error, often breaking something that “warn’t broke.”

Today, maintenance heavily relies on predictive techniques and technologies. Why should safety be any different?

Here are some differences between reactive versus proactive managers when it comes to safety. 

• Reactive managers pore over accident reports. Proactive managers want to know about near misses.
• Reactive managers write employees up for using too short a ladder. Proactive managers look at planned work and obtain or reserve the right sized ladders in advance.
• Reactive managers chide people upon seeing them without their safety glasses. Proactive managers take a different approach. Consider what one manager did to go from 0% compliance to 100% compliance. He had one meeting per shift and went round robin asking people to explain how they plan to do electrical work and feed their family if they lose their eyesight. Nobody was chided. Everybody was challenged.
• Reactive managers check crews in the field to ensure they use the right PPE for taking measurements. Proactive managers ensure that remote measurement is used wherever practical.
• Reactive managers are sticklers for inspection of fall protection PPE; Proactive managers look for ways to avoid work at elevation by relocating equipment or to reduce time at elevation via detailed job planning, prefab, and task-specific training.
• Reactive managers suspend an employee for a traffic violation while driving a company vehicle. Proactive managers send employees to defensive driving school before letting them drive a company vehicle.

Another way maintenance has improved has nothing to do with the maintenance function per se. Failure is designed out of the system, and often, maintenance cost is designed out. Consider sealed bearings, for example; they don’t get full of dust or other contaminants. Energy-efficient motors cost more upfront, but they last far longer because they are just built better. Maintenance cost is slashed when you do something like add an infrared window to your switchgear order specifications.

Similarly, danger can be designed out and/or reduced in likelihood and/or severity by design. The aforementioned infrared window is a prime example. Here are some others:

• Opt for remote racking when purchasing switchgear.
• Where feasible, install permanent ladders for elevated work spaces that are frequently accessed.
• Install guard rails on mezzanines and other elevated spaces.
• Reduce reliance on lift trucks. An industrial engineering analysis of the work flow can produce huge cost savings by eliminating how crisscrossing trips are taken by “work in progress.” While this is outside the scope of the electrical engineering department, the same principles can be applied to almost any common electrical job. And in a factory, the electrical engineering department (which may be just one person) does have some clout. A good book on this subject is The Goal by Eliyahu Goldratt.

Both maintenance efficiency and safety get a big boost from taking advantage of the constant innovations in tools. At one time, silica dust needlessly sentenced many tradespeople to an agonizing death from pulmonary fibrosis (lung hardening). But you also got it from the metal dust generated by cutting or grinding or from years of breathing in sawdust.

Modern cutting and grinding tools of industrial grade have dust collection systems, the agonizing death risk has been designed out. Insulated tools  prevent shock injury, high-leverage tools prevent tendon tearing, and ergonomic tools reduce hand fatigue and are all readily available. They all are designed to make people safer.

Rather than look backwards to determine how you might reduce the chance of a repeat, look forward to how you can prevent the death or injury in the first place.