In utilities and large construction projects, these responsibilities have traditionally been shared and the division of labor spelled out in contract documents. The division of labor spelled out in NFPA 70(E) 110.3 will be familiar to people who have worked in those environments.
The host must inform the contractor of:
- The known hazards covered by NFPA 70(E), if related to the contractor’s work and that might not be recognized by the contractor or its employees.
- Information about the installation that the contractor needs to assess the NFPA 70(E) Chapter 1 requirements.
The host must also report observed contractor employee violations to the contractor.
In practice, safety-assertive hosts greatly exceed these minimums. For example:
- They train, not just inform, the contractor on the known hazards—whether the contractor might recognize them or not.
- They provide the installation information and their own assessment of Chapter 1 requirements.
Contractor employee violations are not merely reported to the contractor; they are also enforced as needed. If a violation crosses a severity threshold, the contractor employee’s access privileges are revoked by security and the contractor is subsequently informed.
The contractor also has duties under 110.3:
- Ensure each contractor employee is instructed in the hazards communicated by the host.
- Ensure each contractor employee follows the work practices required by NFPA 70(E) and safety-related work rules required by the host.
In practice, safety-assertive contractors greatly exceed these minimums. For example:
- They don’t settle for mere instruction; they train and test.
- Their concern is for the safety of all employees, not just their own. They establish a relationship with the host such that a mutual, nearly boundary-less safety system exists. In effect, the host agrees to have the contractor supplement its own safety efforts.
In some cases, the contractor is not amenable to the conditions imposed by a safety-assertive host. The solution there is the host fires or fines the contractor. In some cases, the host is not amendable to a safety-assertive contractor. That issue can usually be overcome with diplomacy. If not, then the contractor needs to decide whether a minimalist approach fits with its strategic objectives.
