營建業勞工安全氣候、安全行為及職業災害之探討

Evaluation of Personal characteristics, safety climate, safety behavior and occupational injury among construction workers

馬綾聲(Ling-Sheng Ma)

指導教授 ： 李素幸

長榮大學/健康科學學院/職業安全與衛生研究所/碩士(2009年)

https://doi.org/10.6833/CJCU.2009.00045

摘要

本研究目的在瞭解營建業勞工安全氣候及安全行為現況，並進一步探討個人因素及上述因素之相關性。本研究採橫斷調查方式，以立意取樣邀請503位營建工地的勞工填寫問卷，問卷採結構式設計，內容分為四大部分：1)個人資料：性別、學歷、婚姻狀況、工作職種、聘僱狀態、安全衛生教育訓練及瞭解程度、每日工作時數及每月工作日數、工資滿意度等；2)安全氣候；3)安全行為；4)職業災害經驗。安全氣候定義為營建業勞工對現場工作環境的知覺，以量表測量包含兩個構面，分別為工作規則與機具設備及個人防護具與安全注重。安全行為定義為工作過程中，個人行為依照程式或規定工作，以量表測量包含兩個構面，分別為安全行為的參與及安全行為的重視。資料之分析以SPSS v.12進行，並以邏輯迴歸來瞭解與安全氣候、安全行為及職業災害有關的重要因素。
研究結果顯示如下：
一、在目前這個工地曾經發生虛驚事故之勞工占34.4%，而曾經發生過意外事故造成身體損傷且請假日數達1日以上者占11.33%。
二、多因子分析顯示，工資滿意度、對安全衛生的瞭解及聘僱狀態與安全氣候感受有重要相關。非常不滿意工資者之OR值為7.27 (95% CI = 3.63 – 14.56)；對安全衛生不瞭解者之OR值為20.88(95% CI=4.50-96.86)；相對於全職勞工，老闆及按件計酬工之OR值為3.75（95% CI=1.45-9.73）及1.94（95% CI=1.05-3.60）。
三、多因子分析顯示，安全氣候感受、工資滿意度及每日工作時數與安全行為有重要相關。安全氣候感受低者OR值為98.29 (95%CI=41.19-234.53)；非常不滿意工資者之OR值為3.47 (95%=1.50-8.03)；工作時數大於12小時者OR值為11.59 (95%CI=2.57-52.28)。
四、多因子分析顯示，與安全氣候感受高者比，感受較低者發生虛驚事故及請假一日以上之事故的OR值為1.74(95%CI=1.02-2.96)及2.19(95%CI=1.01-4.73)；與安全行為較佳者比，較差者發生請假一日以上的事故的OR值為2.76(95%CI=1.28-5.95)。
營造業安全氣候不僅與安全行為有重要相關，且與職業災害也有重要相關，本研究發現勞工的「勞工安全感受」構面得分較低，因此營造業管理者在相關措施上不能侷限在教育訓練、防災計畫或機械設備的改善，現場監督者應管理加強勞工對個人防護具的確實使用及對現場工作安全的重視。

關鍵字

營建業、安全氣候、安全行為、職業災害

並列摘要

Purpose of this study was to understand current situation of safety climate, safety behavior and occupational injuries among construction workers, and to further investigation the association between personal factors and the aforementioned factors. This was a cross-sectional study, where 503 construction workers were invited purposively to complete a structured questionnaire. Information collected in the questionnaire included personal information, safety climates, safety behavior and experience of occupational injuries. Personal information contained age, gender, education, marital status, job types, hiring status, safety and health education, understanding of safety and health, working hours per day, working days per month, and satisfaction of pay. Safety climate was defined as the perception of workplace for construction workers. Safety climate was measured with a scale that contained two dimensions including work rules/equipments and personal protection gears and attention to safety. Safety behavior was defined as worker’s behavior follows the procedures or rules at work. Safety behavior was measured with a scale that contained two dimensions including participation in safety behavior and attentions to safety behavior. Data analysis utilized Statistical software SPSS v.12, where Logistic Regression was applied to model the association between relevant factors and safety climate, safety behavior and occupational injuries. The followings were important results from the study:
1.Among the construction workers, 34% percent of workers reported having near miss experience and 11% of workers reported having taking at least one day off due to occupational injuries.
2.Multivariate analysis showed that satisfaction of pay, understating of workplace safety and health, and hiring status were importantly associated with workers’ perception of safety climate. ORs for those not satisfying with pay or not understaning workplace safety and health were 7.27 (95% CI = 3.63 – 14.56) and 20.88 (95% CI=4.50-98.86), respectively. Compared to full time workers, ORs for self-employed and pay by case workers were 3.75 (95% CI=1.45-9.73) and 1.94 (95% CI=1.05-3.60).
3.Multivariate analysis showed that perception of safety climate, satisfaction of pay and hourly work per day were importantly associated with safety behavior. Compared with workers who had higher safety climate score, workers who had lower safety climate score had lower safety behavior score, with OR=98.29 (95%CI=41.19-234.53). Relative to workers who were satistifed with their pays, workers who were not had lower safety behavior score, with OR=3.47 (95%=1.50-8.03). Compared to wokers who worked 8 hours or less per day, workers who work more than 12 hours per day had lower safety behavior score (OR=11.59, 95%CI=2.57-52.28).
4.Multivariate analysis showed that, compared to workers who had higher safety climate score, workers who had lower safety climate score had higher risk of nearmiss and events that resulting in at least one day away from work (OR=98.29, 95%CI=41.19-234.53 and 2.19 (95%CI=1.01-4.73). Compared to worker who had higher safety behavior score, workers who did not had higher risk of events resulting from at least one day away from work (2.76, 95%CI=1.28-5.95).
Safety climate not only associated with safety behavior, but also with occupational nearmiss and days away from work. This study found that workers had lower score in the dimension of safety perception, therefore management in construction industry should not limit their prevention strategies on training, emergency plan and improvement of machinery equipment only, but also has to supervise workers’ usage of personal protective equipments and enhance supervisors’ attention on workplace safety.

並列關鍵字

construction ； safety climate ； safety behavior ； occupational injuries

參考文獻

李秉展、林耀煌(2005) 安全風氣應用於營造業之初探，工業安全衛生月刊， 2005.8，33-42

吳聰智(2001) 台灣中部四類製造業安全氣候與安全績效之相關研究，國立彰化師範大學工業教育學系博士論文

吳聰智、李金泉(2003) 大專院校實驗室等場所安全氣候之調查研究，勞工安全衛生季刊，11(1)，19-34

許悅玲、葉文健、陳陽正光、蕭湘雲(2008)組織氣候對安全氣候及安全績效之影響-以航空公司運務人員為例，Journal of Crisis Management.2008 Vol.5 NO.2

Brown,R.L.,Holmes,H.(1986).The use of a factor-analytic procedure for assessing the validity of an employee safety climate model. Accident Analysis and Prevention 18(6).455-470.