Occupational Safety And Health Risks For Hearing Capabilities

The Importance of Occupational Safety in the Workplace

Discuss about the Occupational Safety and Health Risks for Hearing Capabilities.
 

The current study focuses upon the health risks affecting workers in a confined place and the importance of occupational safety in reducing the health risks within a workplace. The occupational safety   plays a pivotal role in reducing the different kinds of hazards. The hazards could arise in a factory or different kinds of workplace. The hazards range in severances from small or minor hazards to the ones which could claim the life of people. Therefore, occupational safety serves as the backbone based upon which workplace practices are effectively maintained and monitored (Kim et al. 2017).

For the purpose of reducing the work related hazards   the employees need to be provided with effective safety management training programs. In addition, responsibility taking and effective supervision from the management are two important factors which could reduce the risk of workplace hazards. The risk of hazards is more within confined places such as fire, chemical emissions due to leakage in the storage vessels within factory settings.  The risks are much pronounced in underground working conditions such as manholes. Some of the occupational risk hazards have much lethal consequences over the health of the employees inducing the development of sickness such as cancers. Some of these could also have pronounced effect on the overall well being of people as the accidental hazards could lead to severe consequences such as arm and leg injury, loss of eyesight, hearing capabilities etc.

The current assignment discusses the health risks related to workers within confined spaces and effects of occupational safety in reducing the health risks. There has been sufficient research and discussion over the topic which places sufficient importance upon the inclusion of training along with standard auditing techniques for reducing the chances for occurrence of such incidents.  However, a number of gaps or loopholes are faced in the process such as the lack of support from management and ineffective finances could lead to gaps within the safety measures.  The study here takes into consideration the different aspects of health risks management within confined spaces by stressing upon occupation therapy.

There are many factors which produce  occupational  risks at workplace such as   exposure  to carcinogens  due to the dust and the smoke emitted at the factory settings, noise emitted from the various machines at the factories,  ergonomic stress arising due to uncomfortable  work situation and additional risk due to falling, slipping etc. As mentioned by Burlet-Vienney (2015), the asbestos exposure in factory settings could lead to asbestosis, silicosis and coal worker’s pneumoconiosis are also due to workplace exposure.  As reported by Prüss-Üstün and Neira (2016), the work related risks resulted in 775000 deaths worldwide in the year 2000. The leading cause of death was due to unintentional injuries followed by COPD and cancer of the trachea, bronchus and lungs.

Types of Health and Occupational Risks in Confined Spaces

The different types of occupational and health risk from working in a confined place can be discussed over here. The hazards could be divided into two basic types such as atmospheric hazards, non-atmospheric hazards.  As mentioned by Botti  et al. (2018), the  atmospheric hazard could be defined as any kinds of health risks caused due to high amount of pollutants within the environment. It could incapacitate an employee by causing acute illness such as asthma or other breathing rated disorders, lung infection, cancer etc. Some of the major causes of atmospheric hazards are –oxygen deficiency, irritant atmospheres and toxic atmospheres. The other non-atmospheric hazards are – mechanical hazards, electrical hazards, biological hazards and environmental hazards etc.  The hazards could arise within the confined spaces mainly due to a number if activities such as cleaning of silos, cleaning of underground sewage, welding of tanks and welding of pipes.

There could be a number of health risks associated with people working within confined spaces such as manholes. The manhole provides a unique environment to the people working over there. The risk often arises due to flash or blasts within confined spaces. It has been found cables and conductors in a manhole operate under high voltage. The insulation and old cables can become brittle and subject to splices within the wet and congested environment. The existing cables and splices can cause physical damage to individual be generating arcing fault. As commented by Boyle (2015), the contact with exposed, energised electrical conductors or circuit parts operating at 50 volts or more could cause physical damage to the employees. As per the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines, the workers performing under strict and closed environments such as manhole should be provided with personal protective equipments Level 4.This level of protection is mainly offered to people working in decontamination areas.  It is suitable for an environment which offers lowest level of respiratory and skin protection.

The literature review is a systematic procedure and is based upon an extensive search criterion which has been followed over here. For instance, a number of secondary databases such as NCBI, ELSEVIER etc have been searched for gathering of the required articles. For searching of the articles a number of extensive keywords have been used which are occupational hazards, confined places hazard, manhole hazards, workplace hazards management. The articles which have been extracted through the detailed research of the keywords only have been taken into consideration.  The rest have been eliminated for the purpose of   removing the confounding biases.

Health Risks for Workers in Manholes

Additionally, a number of filters have been applied for finding out the research articles such as the articles which   have been printed in English only have been taken into consideration. The articles which have been printed in any other language have been eliminated. Moreover, the articles which have been published within the last 15 years only have been taken into consideration. The ones which have been published prior to that have been eliminating. For the purpose of the analysis the articles have been grouped into similar dissimilar ideas which have been further grouped into themes. These have been used for doing thematic analysis, which helps in arriving at a particular point. 

In this respect, statistical figures could be estimated as furnished by the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) and International Labour Organization (ILO) for understanding the major occupational health risk hazards. These have been further divided into workplace injuries, occupational diseases and dangerous occurrences.

The workplace injury has been divided into fatal injuries, major injury, minor injury, etc. The statistics were calculated per 100,000 employed persons working within a factory or exposed to confined places (Wsh-national-stats 2017). The minor workplace injury rate was 363 per 100,000 people employed whereas the major injury rate was 17.4. It was founds that 42 workers were injured at a rate of 1.2 per 100, 000 employed persons. 574 workers sustained injuries at a rate of 16.9 per 100,000 employees. As reported by Manwaring and Conroy (2004), due to higher number of injuries and related sickness 544,687 man-days were lost. The  occupational disease had an occurrence rate of 23.6 per 100,000 employees (Wsh-report 2017). The   leading cause of occupational disease was due to work related muscoskeltal disorder. The muscoskeletal disorders could be enlisted such as back pain which mainly arose due to improper workplace ergonomics. It was also found that 83% of the workplaces produced static noise levels greater than 85dBA, which could lead to neuro as well as cardiovascular disorder within the workers.

In order to curb the menace related to confined spaces, the Ministry of Manpower have come out with Confined Space Management Program (CSMP). The Program aimed to prevent injuries and deaths in confined spaces from asphyxiation, fire explosion and gas poisoning. Under the WSH confined spaces regulations 2009, gas testing of the atmosphere need to be carried out by a competent person (Wsh-national-stats 2017). As mentioned by Suruda  et al. (2005), people working within the confined spaces such as manhole must receive training on health safety before entering such space.

The Literature Review Process

One of the gaps which have been found within the process   is the lack of effective personal protective gears. For example, the ones working in closed spaces such as manholes are not provided with level personal protective gears, which are necessary to prevent potential biological risks. As suggested by Botti  et al. (2018), post-incident  testing  on a number of occasions revealed poisoning due to lethal doses of  carbon monoxide  and hydrogen sulphide. The lack of proper ventilation in the confined places can lead to incidents of asphyxiation which accounts to 53%.  In the   lack of necessary rescue operations the well being of the employees could be threatened. 

A number of different literatures could be studied in order to understand the different kinds of occupational risks associated and the necessary hazards management steps which could be taken to reduce the risks. The confined space is defined as a large space which is configured in a manner that an employee can bodily enter and perform their assigned work. Some of the confined places has limited entry such as vaults, tanks and storage bins etc. As mentioned by Lingard  et al. (2015), the accidents within confined places occur due to lack of awareness within the workers regarding the potential dangers.  A number of factors are responsible for confined spaces injury such as non –identification of confined spaces, absence of orientation and training, reliance on temporary workers in some cases. Most of the times, the accidents take place due to negligence from the management. The lack of appropriate training and orientation to the employees could increase the risk factors for such accidents. In many cases, temporary employees are hired due to the shortage of staff. This further means that many of the temporary employees hired lacked the specific expertise to manage the tasks.  Some of the additional barriers which are faced over here are the unawareness in the employers regarding the importance of conducting training. Additionally, lack of funding can also affect the implementation of the training measures (Botti et al. 2018). The lack of a positive work culture can further affect the proper implementation of safety measures.

The lack of a positive work culture can result in disputes within the management and employee. An irresponsible management can lead to safety gaps which could in turn put the life of the employees at risk. The lack of funding, staff absenteeism are some of the additional factors. There are large  number of public and private sector  industries , a few  of which are not  properly registered and fail to follow  the  legal guidelines based  on safety measures.  As argued by Hamid  et al. (2017), the companies which are not properly registered fail to receive sufficient funds from the government which affects their safety infrastructure.  Another factor which is worth concern over here is high amount of absenteeism or lack of trained staff. The gap is often filled by the employment of the temporary staffs who lack sufficient skills and knowledge regarding the safety measures.  The lack of funds also means that the employees have to compromise on the protective gears, which are a necessity for working in confined spaces. The issue of absenteeism have also led to workload imbalance and leads to the organizations hiring less trained employees or the employees lacking sufficient expertise with regards to safety management. The high rates of absenteeism could be due to staff burnout along with less support and poor appraisal from the management. The labourers often have to spend long working hours in the factory which could lead to burnout. The lack of funds results in the employers paying less salary bonus to the employees. The lack of experienced staff further challenges the safety measures of the organization.

Accident Statistics from MOM and ILO

It is necessary to develop a clear idea about the workplace safety framework.  It could be further explained with the help of a number of theories and models. These models have been further discussed in order to understand the probability of occurrence of an accident and the causative factors. The causative factors have been further supported with the help of a number of theories and models. One such theory is the Dominor theory which proposed five factors responsible for an accident to occur within the workplace environment.  Some of the factors which could be enlisted over here are the social environment, the incidences of negligence,   injury due to mechanical hazard etc.  It has been stated that the accidents could be stopped by removing the central factor which in this perspective are the hazardous conditions itself . As argued by MacCarron (2006), in the lack of proper identification of the hazardous factors the risk management cannot be effectively implemented.

The dominor theory placed importance on a single factor as the cause behind a plausible injury or accident. This view had been further contradicted by the Multiple  causation model which states that there are several  factors  which combine  together to give  rise to an unsafe  environment or accident. The model considers a number of factors which could contribute to the risk factors within a confined workplace setting. Some of these could be further broken down in a number of additional factors such as motivation, capacity, design of workstation, conscious decision to ERR.

 The relationship between occupational safety and health risk hazards could be further explained with the help of the  Firenze model.  The model sets up an integrated relationship between man, machine and environment. Every individual performs their job as a function of the man-machine network. As suggested by MacCarron  (2006), the smooth functioning of the system is seen as a dependent factor based upon which success in a particular task in obtained. It has been further ascertained that there should be an appropriate match between the human and machine elements. The model states that men will use the skills or knowledge acquired by them for making effective decisions. However, inadequate environmental conditions and poor functioning equipments can further affect the functioning capacity   performance and functioning capacity of the workers. As mentioned by Abdalwhab and Yassin (2016), the physical and psychological stressors also affect the performing power of a man.

The lack of motivation within the workers could affect their concentration levels and increase the chances of risks or accidents.  This is because the employee may feel less connected with their work. As mentioned by Chinniah (2017), the ones working as plumbers often have to work in confined places such as manholes. As suggested by Hamid et al. (2017), apart from the uncomfortable name the claustrophobic environment also affects the working motivations of an employee.  One may feel less productive while working and may feel that the work they are engaged in is unmeaningful which further affects their dedication and awareness levels. In the lack of zeal and awareness an employee may not show the required amount of dedication or practice standard safety protocols. 

The workstation is not appropriately designed as per the need and requirements of the employees.  For instance, when a person is entering a manhole for some operational works there are increased chances of flash hazards due to splices in the electric cables or conductors. In order to reduce the chances of such hazards proper insulation of the electric wires need to be done. As mentioned by Zheng et al. (2017), the   inspection works under the manholes are very less as they are not frequented by many employees. Hence, a splice in the conductor could remain unnoticed for a long period of time. The underground claustrophobic environment along with the high temperature   makes it difficult for the laborers to work over there. Additionally, below the ground the concentrations of carbon monoxide and hydrogen peroxide are high which could result in asphyxiation of the laborers   working in the manholes (Cheung et al. 2018). Therefore, focus should be given diverted upon building the infrastructure further such as the safety vaults which could provide an inlet for fresh oxygen, as oxygen depletion can make the conditions worse. Additionally, the workers could be provided with personal protective gears which could reduce the exposure to hazardous chemicals or vapors.

 As mentioned by Blau and Schwartz (2018), lack of sufficient expertise in the employees could further lead to wrong decision making.   For example, a laborer may decide to use an unguarded machine without knowing the plausible dangers of using the same to the entire unit.  Therefore, the causation of such incidents could be reduced by providing sufficient training as well as implementing regular audits and internal quality checks by the employers. As suggested by Boden  et al. (2016), ineffective communication gateways could also affect the safety standards within a workplace setup. It has been seen that incomplete and poor instructions could lead to the workers being unaware of the associated dangers. Some of the causes behind such incomplete communication are irresponsible management, absorption of temporary staffs and sacking of old staffs. As argued by Cooney (2016), the old staffs are used to the management and can apply individual expertise in understanding the work assigned. On the other hand, temporary staffs are not well aware of the work conditions and acquainted with the precautions they have to apply in their field of work.  Therefore, putting the newly appointed staffs under trained leaders could reduce the chances of lethal accidents.  As suggested by Smith  et al. (2014), one of the main reasons for maximal amount of staff turnover is high work pressure, less pay and lack of appreciation from the administration.  The poor communication networks could be mainly attributed to the lack of an effective and positive work culture. Some of the factors which have been identified over here further contribute to the risk. It was found that over 82% of the confined spaces were entered by the workers without pre-entry hazards identification. It was further found that less than 11% of the organizations had emergency rescue operations in place (Cunningham and Sinclair 2015).

In this respect, the framework to workplace safety can play a pivotal role in maintaining the safety of the workers within confined spaces.  The framework which has been followed over here is a permit-to –work system. It had been further developed to ensure the safety of the workers who enter the confined space. As suggested by Ling  et al. (2015), the ones without the permit- to-work certificate should not be allowed to enter the confined space. Some of the things which are crucial over here for ensuring safety standards are a risk assessment report completed by the competent authority, regular testing of the atmosphere for accessing over exposure to gases such as carbon monoxide under the manhole conditions. The Permit- to-work certificate should be properly signed by the proprietor. As suggested by Hutson  et al. (2015), the proprietor need to personally visit the space and ensure that the conditions have not been altered since the first issuance of the certificate. However, in case the manhole environment is not accessible by the proprietor of the organization themselves they must ensure that it has been properly checked by the inspection committee (Cunningham and Sinclair 2015). The implementation of effective safety features could reduce the chances of occurrences of occupational hazards.

According to the United States Department of Labour – Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (2018), many workplaces contain areas that are considered “confined spaces” this is because while they are not stringently designed for people, they are large enough for workers to enter and perform certain jobs. A confined space also has restricted acess for entry and exists. It is not designed for continuous occupancy. Confined spaces mainly include but are not limited to vessels, tans, storage bins, silos, vaults, vessels, pits, tunnels, manholes, housing, equipment pipelines, ductwork etc. OSHA mainly employs the term “permit-required confined space” (permit space) in order to describe a particular confined space, which have certain set of characteristics which are again framed by OSHA. The first characteristics include has the potential of contain or generally contains hazardous atmosphere; contains special material that has significant potential to engulf an entrant; has walls on all the four sides that converge inwards or is build with special floors that slope downward and taper into a much smaller area which could trap or asphyxiate an entrant; or contains any unrecognised health or safety hazard like exposed live wires, unguarded machinery or heat stress.

According to the WSH Council (2010), working in confined spaces is hazardous in comparison to working in other workplace settings because the entrances and exits of the confined places is small enough to comfortably allow the entrant to evacuate during the time of emergency like flood or sudden collapse of free-flowing material. This confined surface area makes it difficult for the entrant to self-rescue further increasing the chances of fatality. Moreover, the interior configuration of the confined places even makes it even more difficult for the rescue team to enter into that particular place and safe the entrant. WSH Council is of the opinion that the natural ventilation of the confined places for example, manholes are often not adequate enough to maintain a breathable quality of air. This is because the interior configuration of some confined spaces does not allow proper circulation of air leading to a claustrophobic condition which leads to death out of choking or suffocation WSH Council (2010).

In response to the death and the casualties occurring in the confined places, WSH council Forum Confined Space has published special Accident Case Studies. These case studies mainly highlighted that the death toll in the confined places mainly arise from the lack of proper aeration and use of harmful or toxic material in the cleaning process (manholes). As per the synopsis of the accidents published by the WSH Council in the accidental case study report, a worker who is in the business of cleaning ISO tanks was unconscious inside the tank and later the paramedics pronounced him dead. The reason for death was acute toluene and acetone poisoning. This ISO tanks with one manhole has an internal diameter of 50 cm and 6 meter in length and hence can easily be regarded as confined place. The probable cause of death highlighted by the report is the mechanical blower was not working properly. As a result the spillage of the thinner (toluene + acetone) during the work inside the ISO tank lead to accumulation of the toluene and acetone vapour within the tank, resulting the deceased fainting and subsequently chocking to death (Ministry of Manpower Singapore, 2018). 

According to the WSH (Risk Management) Regulations 2006, in order to generate a proper framework in order to mitigate the fatal risk arising out from the confined places, proper risk assessment is required to be conducted. This will help in the identification of the safety and health hazards associated with the individual entering and working in the confined places and thereby helping to frame proper risk mitigation framework. The step in the risk assessment procedure is assessment the requirement of manual entry into the confined space as this will led to the evolution of alternatives in order to get the work done. After this come the identification and the evaluation of the confined spaces. WSH Risk Management Regulations (2006) is of the opinion that all confined spaces must be properly identified, documented and labelled. This includes chemical hazard and physical hazards associated with the worker while they are working in the confined places.  At last, the risk assessment must be done in the domain of special control measures that will be useful in mitigating the risk associated with the confined places (Garcez and De Almeida 2014).

Based on the risk assessment of working in the confined places, a stringent risk mitigation framework can be erected. The risk mitigation framework starts with the precautions that must be taken into consideration while entering into the manhole. Entry inside the manhole should be done only after the entrant has a valid certificate of training to work inside the confined places along with the proper health fitness certificate (Burlet-Vienney et al. 2015).

After the validation of the experience of the entrant to work inside the manhole, the predatory tools should be used in order to avoid the injury arising from accidents. According to WSH 2018 Plus (2018) – Ministry of Manpower Singapore, entry inside the manhole can lead to the generation of accidental fall. Selecting proper equipments for the fall protection while working in the confined places like the manhole helps to protect injury. The safest and most effective fall prevention system mainly encompasses self retracting lifelines. These lifelines should be integrated with a special retrieval system in all confined space entry situations. While choosing the fall protection equipment in confined space entry, exist and rescue, three main components must be taken into consideration on priority and this includes the anchorage, body support and connector. If the confined space demands vertical entry like in the case of the manhole ad there is no provision for fixed ladder, one need an install a firm anchor point that is capable of supporting the required arresting forces. In case of manhole, tripod is considered as excellent options as they are easily available, easy to install by the help of one worker and can easily be transported from one location to the another (OSHA 2015). However, tripod has one limitation and this is the size of opening and such that it might become difficult to accommodate over the man hole. In order to avoid the limitation of tripod more advanced fall prevention equipment can be used and this include davit arm or more commonly known as davit post. Davits can be adjusted into diverse range of base configuration that makes it even more ideal to work under the manhole settings (Armstrong 2017). When it comes in selecting the body support, comfort along with durability are the two major factors that must be taken into consideration. If an entrant is destined to be working under a confined place for a considerable period of time or under numerous locations during the entire tenure of the day, high quality body harness which has built-in shoulder, leg padding, back support and soft edging must be preferred. However, in case of manhole, the durability is given more preference and thus the harness with protective coating must be designed that can easily resist dirt and grease. The internal atmosphere of the manhole is the next step that must come under the risk mitigation framework as per the rules sated by the OSHA. The level of oxygen for the safe operations inside the manhole must range in between 19.5% to 23.5% by volume (Srihari et al. 2017). Rekus (2018) is of the opinion that the oxygen concentration which is below 19.5% by volume of atmospheric oxygen is considered to be unsafe for human operations. Oxygen concentration must be above 23.5 % by volume. In order to detect that the oxygen concentration is safe for the workers who are working under the confine places, combustible gas detectors is required to be used. Combustible gas detectors need at least 10% oxygen by volume for proper readings and lower level of oxygen will result in lower flammability readings. Other things that must be taken into consideration while erecting the framework for mitigating the fatal risk of the worker working inside the manhole includes presence of sufficient number of persons as a standby outside the man hole while one person have entered inside the hole. This standby population will also include the people who are appointed to carry out rescue operation inside the manhole and those who are responsible providing the support services outside. The rescue team must be equipped with effective disaster management tools along with active supervision from a paramedic team to give basic yet immediate medical support of the condition demands (McCurley 2013). While working under the manhole settings if there are any signs and symptoms indicating that there is a decrease in the amount of oxygen inside the manhole then the operations must be stalled immediately. Special oxygen concentration detecting instruments that will detect the level of oxygen inside the man hole for real time must be used (Occupational Safety and Health Branch Labour Department, 2018).

Further mitigation framework must contain provision form ventilation. For example, the tank is small and contains heavy vapour and is fitted with the single top manhole it is may be sufficient to exhaust from the bottom of the tank with a ventilation duct and thus enabling “make-up” air to enter through the man hole. However, while considering the ventilation method, one must take into account the layout of the space and the position of openings along with the properties of the pollutants. This is help to make the circulation of air for ventilation effective (Health and Safety Executive UK 2014).

A number of themes have emerged from the literature review related to the safety measures for working within confined spaces which have been discussed over here. Some of these are high amount of absenteeism from the staff, lack of workplace safety frameworks, risk factors associated with working in confined space, lack of proper understanding of the confined space and development of a proper framework through which the risks could be mitigated.

The absenteeism in the staff could be due to a number of factors such as lack of interests in the work, risk factors associated with the work, lack of effective monetary support and appreciation from the management. Working in confined places such as manhole has been often associated with low self –esteem and depression within the workers. The workers have often complained about the underground environment which is most unsuitable for working. Additionally, constant exposure to sludge and waste deposits have been further associated with development of health disorders such as nausea and vomiting (Abdalwhab and Yassin 2016). The exposure to high amount of compressed gases within the underground environment such as hydrogen peroxide and carbon monoxide could lead to the development of carbon monoxide poisoning. The labourers working in the manhole environment have often been trapped. In the lack of help and support they have often succumbed to poisonous gases. Some of the other factors which have been highlighted over here are lack of willingness in the management to provide effective training and support with the help of personal protective gears.  As mentioned by Stojkovi? (2015), the level 1 personal protective gears have been found to be effective in preventing the people from incidents of asphyxiation. However, as argued by Cole and Fielding (2007), the lack of proper inspection and measures taken by the management ensures that such precautionary measures are never implemented. The less pay also affects the zeal of the employees to perform better or continue with the job, as they feel their efforts have not been sufficiently appreciated.

The lack of workplace safety frameworks could further increase the chances of occupational hazards. For instance, the lack of attention in the management can delay the implementation of permit to work. As mentioned by Cole and Fielding (2007), in 85% of the cases the workers enter the confined places without proper permit, which increases the chances of accidents manifold times. Some of the risk factors which are prevalent over here are electrical shorts from circuit spills. In this respect, some of the past incidents have been taken into consideration where accidents have occurred in manhole sites from toxic gases or cable wires. The accident occurred when a constructor of Singapore telecom was laying down cable wires inside manholes. The man was suffocated by the toxic gases inside the manhole and soon lost consciousness. On understanding the seriousness of the incident a colleague and supervisor of the man had entered the manhole and they too lost consciousness. On further inspection it was found that the manhole contained huge amount of hydrogen sulphide gas, which accumulated from the decomposition of sludge or waste.  High concentration of the gas may lead to loss of consciousness and the victim may die from asphyxiation. It was later found that the contractor had not provided suitable breathing apparatus to the workers who entered and were working in a confined space. Hence, there was a breach of the factories act under which safe work procedures need to be implemented. The isolation and ventilation of the space serves as important criteria over here. The organizations should strictly follow the Code of practice for entry and safe working in confined places. Similar incidents have been reported from Jurong East where a man died due to lack of oxygen working 3 metre underneath the manhole along with his two colleagues. As suggested by Wsh-report  (2017), a person can fall into comma if the oxygen levels fall below 6%. Oxygen depletion and accumulation of hydrogen peroxide have been found to be the most common causes. As mentioned by Suruda  et al. (2005), a safety accessor needs to conduct atmospheric testing before confined places entry could be permitted. Additionally, the permits need to be signed by the proprietor before the safety laws could be implemented. As commented by Spillane and Oyedele (2013), the employees often do not wait for permits before entering the confined spaces due to emergency. The emergency evacuation systems are not in place which could result in much more serious consequences.

Conclusion

The current study focuses upon occupation related hazards and management of the hazards through effective steps or measures. In this respect, the occupational risk related to confined places has been highlighted where the particular focus of interest is manholes. The manhole jobs have often been associated with a menial job status.  However, the conditions in manhole are not favorable for working such as the accumulation of toxic gases such as hydrogen peroxide could lead to asphyxiation. The incidences of asphyxiation could lead to death within the employees.

Additionally, a number of factors have been highlighted over here such as unfavorable working conditions, absenteeism of the employees, lack of effective safety frameworks, risk factors associated with working in confined places and lack of proper understanding of the confined places.  The occupational risks or hazards have been further explained with the help of a number of theories and models. These theories helped in drawing a relationship between environment and hazards. The skill sets possessed by the employees also play a pivotal role over here. The responsibility lies with the management to provide effective training to the employees along with ensuring that sufficient safety measures are implemented.  One of the most common gaps which have been found over here is ineffective implementation of the permit-to-safety. The workers have been permitted inside the confined places without the permit- to –safety certificate. Additionally, the lack of safety gears further endangers the safety standards of the laborers working in the factories. The lack of proper understanding of confined places also affects the safety measures. It could be attributed to irresponsible management who fail to brief the employees properly. The lack of education regarding   choosing of personal protective gears could further endanger the safety of the workers. In this respect, the workers entering the manholes were not provided with precautionary measure against toxic gases such as carbon monoxide and hydrogen sulphide which in excess concentration led to asphyxiation. Additionally, there was a breach of the legal guidelines   where the workers were made to enter the manholes or other confined places without proper permit-to-safety certificate. The lack of training further made the situation worse   as huge number of staff turnover was noted owing to inefficient safety or precautionary measures in place.  Additionally, physical, psychological stress along with lack of motivation further affected the staff performance. In this respect, training and effective communication practices could further improve the safety standards. 

References

Abdalwhab, S.M. and Yassin, K.E.E., 2016. Hazards Arising from Working in Confined Spaces Case Study: Khartoum North Industrial Area, Sudan. University Of Khartoum Engineering Journal, 5(1).

Armstrong, R., 2017. Manhole frame with one or more handholds. U.S. Patent 9,845,586.

Blau, P.M. and Schwartz, J.E., 2018. Crosscutting social circles: Testing a macrostructural theory of intergroup relations. Abingdon:Routledge, pp.45-75.

Boden, L.I., Spieler, E.A. and Wagner, G.R., 2016, March. The changing structure of work: implications for workplace health and safety in the US. In Future of Work Symposium, US Department of Labor, pp.72-85.

Botti, L., Duraccio, V., Gnoni, M.G. and Mora, C., 2018. An integrated holistic approach to health and safety in confined spaces. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, pp.56-72.

Botti, L., Duraccio, V., Gnoni, M.G. and Mora, C., 2018. An integrated holistic approach to health and safety in confined spaces. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, pp.65-78.

Boyle, T., 2015. Health and safety: risk management. Abingdon:Routledge, pp.24-36.

Burlet-Vienney, D., Chinniah, Y. and Bahloul, A., 2014. The need for a comprehensive approach to managing confined space entry: summary of the literature and recommendations for next steps. Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene, 11(8), pp.485-498.

Burlet-Vienney, D., Chinniah, Y., Bahloul, A. and Roberge, B., 2015. Design and application of a 5 step risk assessment tool for confined space entries. Safety science, 80, pp.144-155.

Burlet-Vienney, D., Chinniah, Y., Bahloul, A. and Roberge, B., 2015. Occupational safety during interventions in confined spaces. Safety science, 79, pp.19-28.

Burlet-Vienney, D., Chinniah, Y., Bahloul, A. and Roberge, B., 2015. Design and application of a 5 step risk assessment tool for confined space entries. Safety science, 80, pp.144-155.

Carayon, P., Hancock, P., Leveson, N., Noy, I., Sznelwar, L. and Van Hootegem, G., 2015. Advancing a sociotechnical systems approach to workplace safety–developing the conceptual framework. Ergonomics, 58(4), pp.548-564.

Cheung, W.F., Lin, T.H. and Lin, Y.C., 2018. A Real-Time Construction Safety Monitoring System for Hazardous Gas Integrating Wireless Sensor Network and Building Information Modeling Technologies. Sensors, 18(2), p.436.

Chinniah, Y., Bahloul, A., Burlet-Vienney, D. and Roberge, B., 2017. Development of a Confined Space Risk Analysis and Work Categorization Tool. Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail, pp.126-225.

Cole, B.L. and Fielding, J.E., 2007. Health impact assessment: a tool to help policy makers understand health beyond health care. Annu. Rev. Public Health, 28, pp.393-412.

Cooney, J.P., 2016. Health and safety in the construction industry-a review of procurement, monitoring, cost effectiveness and strategy (Doctoral dissertation, University of Salford), pp.84-95.

Cunningham, T.R. and Sinclair, R., 2015. Application of a model for delivering occupational safety and health to smaller businesses: case studies from the US. Safety science, 71, pp.213-225.

Cunningham, T.R. and Sinclair, R., 2015. Application of a model for delivering occupational safety and health to smaller businesses: case studies from the US. Safety science, 71, pp.213-225.

Garcez, T.V. and De Almeida, A.T., 2014. Multidimensional risk assessment of manhole events as a decision tool for ranking the vaults of an underground electricity distribution system. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, 29(2), pp.624-632.

Hamid, A., Saleem, W., Yaqub, G. and Ghauri, M.U.D., 2017. Comparative assessment of respiratory and other occupational Health effects among Elementary workers. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, pp.1-8.

Health and Safety Executive UK. 2014. Safe work in confined spaces: Confined Spaces Regulations 1997. Access date: 29^th June. Retrieved from:  https://www.hse.gov.uk/pUbns/priced/l101.pdf

Hutson, A.C., Gibson, R.L. and Barber, J., 2015. Big Pipe—Tight Quarters: Lessons Learned from Large Diameter Urban Pipelines. In Pipelines 2015 (pp. 133-144).

Kim, Y.R., Jeong, B.Y. and Park, M.H., 2017. Effects of Job Satisfaction, Organizational Support and Risk Perception on Safety Consciousness in Confined Space Workers. Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea, 36(3).

Ling, A.L., Robertson, C.E., Harris, J.K., Frank, D.N., Kotter, C.V., Stevens, M.J., Pace, N.R. and Hernandez, M.T., 2015. High-resolution microbial community succession of microbially induced concrete corrosion in working sanitary manholes. PloS one, 10(3), p.e0116400.

Lingard, H., Pink, S., Harley, J. and Edirisinghe, R., 2015. Looking and learning: using participatory video to improve health and safety in the construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 33(9), pp.740-751.

MacCarron, C., 2006. Confined space fatalities, pp.24-35.

Manwaring, J.C. and Conroy, C., 2004. Occupational confined space-related fatalities: Surveillance and prevention. Journal of safety research, 21(4), pp.157-164.

McCurley, L., 2013. Falls from Height: A Guide to Rescue Planning. John Wiley & Sons.

Ministry of Manpower Singapore. 2018. WSH Council Forum Confined Space Accident Case Studies. Access date: 29^th June. Retrieved from: https://www.wshc.sg/files/wshc/upload/cms/file/2014/Confined_Space_Accident_Case_Studies.pdf

Occupational Safety and Health Branch Labour Department. 2018. Safety Guide for work in Manhole. Access date: 29^th June. Retrieved from:  https://www.labour.gov.hk/eng/public/os/D/Manhole.pdf

O’Connell, D.J., 2018. Cargo Truck Tanks: An Often-Unrecognized Confined Space Hazard. Professional Safety, 63(06), pp.46-51.

Prüss-Üstün, A. and Neira, M., 2016. Preventing disease through healthy environments: a global assessment of the burden of disease from environmental risks. World Health Organization, pp.105-165.

Rekus, J. F. (2018). Complete confined spaces handbook. CRC Press.

SAFETY, C., 2015. New OSHA rescue requirements for confined space retrieval: what you should know. Occupational Health & Safety.

Smith, P.A., Lockhart, B., Besser, B.W. and Michalski, M.A., 2014. Exposure of unsuspecting workers to deadly atmospheres in below-ground confined spaces and investigation of related whole-air sample composition using adsorption gas chromatography. Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene, 11(12), pp.800-808.

Spillane, J. and Oyedele, L.O., 2013. Strategies for effective management of health and safety in confined site construction. Construction Economics and Building, 13(4), pp.50-64.

Srihari, V., Sanjay, D., Nimbalkar, P. and Amrut, S., 2017. Overview on Safety Guidelines for Confined Space Working Environment. International Journal of Engineering and Management Research (IJEMR), 7(6), pp.158-164.

Stojkovi?, A.,2015. Occupational safety in hazardous confined space. Inženjerstvo zaštite, p.137.

Suruda, A.J., Pettit, T.A., Noonan, G.P. and Ronk, R.M., 2005. Deadly rescue: The confined space hazard. Journal of hazardous materials, 36(1), pp.45-53.

United States Department of Labour – Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 2018. Confined Places. Access date: 29^th June. Retrieved from: https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/confinedspaces/

WSH 2018 Plus. 2018. Advancing Workplace Safety & Health In Singapore For 2018 And Beyond. Ministry of Manpower. Access date: 29^th June. Retrieved from:  https://www.mom.gov.sg/~/media/mom/documents/press-releases/2016/0825-annex-a-wsh-2018-plus.pdf

WSH Council. 2010.Technical Advisory on Working Safely in Confined Spaces. Access date: 29^th June. Retrieved from:  https://www.wshc.sg/files/wshc/upload/cms/file/2014/cs2.pdf

Wsh-national-stats 2017, Wsh-national-stats, Available at : https://www.mom.gov.sg/~/media/mom/documents/safety-health/reports-stats/wsh-national-statistics/wsh-national-stats-2017 [Accessed on 28 June 2018]

Wsh-report 2017, Wsh-report, Available at : https://www.wshc.sg/wps/portal/!ut/p/a1/jY89D4IwEIZ_iwNr7_gQjVvjIFGMA6jQxYCpBYMtKRX-vshoBL3tLs-T9z1gkACTWVuKzJRKZtV7Z_4lPHieQyPcbYLYRursMYgXrh35Xg-k48D65P7n48hQ_OWfgU0hQ4MBmIjYAhOVyod3UypzdymAaX7jmmvy1P25MKZuVhZa2HUdEUqJipOrIqW08JtUqMZA8slC_TgmeJ9XbUhnLxar6r0!/dl5/d5/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh/?action=cmsPublicView&cmsId=C-2014091001131 [Accessed on 27 June 2018]

Zheng, W., Shuai, J. and Shan, K., 2017. The energy source based job safety analysis and application in the project. Safety science, 93, pp.9-15.