3 pma salehuddin - analysis osh legislation

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER TITLE PAGE
TABLE OF CONTENTS i
LIST OF TABLES iii
LIST OF FIGURES iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS v
LIST OF APPENDICES vi
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 OSHA 1
1.2 PMA Question 2
1.3 PMA Objective 2
2 DEFINITION REVIEW 2
2.1 Self Regulation 2
2.2 So Far as is Practicable 3
3 METHODOLOGY 4
3.1 Analysis Method 4
3.2 Recommendation Method 4
4 ANALYSIS OF REGULATION 4
4.1 Employers’ Safety and Health General Policy Statements 4
4.2 Control of Industrual Major Accident Hazards 5
4.3 Safety and Health Committee 8
4.4 Classification, Packaging and Labeling of Hazardous’ Chemicals 10
4.5 Safety and Health Officer 11
4.6 Use and Standards of Exposure of Chemical Hazardous to Health12
4.7 Notification of Accident, Dangerous Occurrence, Occupational
Poisoning and Occupational Disease 14

ii
4.8 Analysis – Reflection of Self Regulation 15
5 RECOMMENDATION 17
5.1 Redefine “Practicable” 17
5.2 Thought Process 18
5.3 Financial Implication 19
6 CONCLUSION 20
REFERENCES 21
Appendices A - C 23-25

iii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE
4.1 Self Regulation in CIMAH Regulation 5 ....
4.2 Self Regulation in SHC Regulation 8 ......
4.3 Self Regulation in CPL Regulation 10 ....
4.4 Self Regulation in SHO Regulation 11 ....
4.5 Self Regulation in USECHH Regulation 12
4.6 Self Regulation in NADOPOD Regulation 14

iv
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE
4.1 Reflection of self regulation .......................................................... 16
4.2 Practicability of self regulatory regulations ................................... 16
6.1 OSH strategic drivers for the national OSH master plan ............... 20

v
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CEP - Continuous Education Program
CIMAH - Control of Industrial Major Accident Hazards
CPL - Classification, Packaging and Labeling of Hazardous
Chemicals
CSDS - Chemical Safety Data Sheet
DG - Director General
ERP - Emergency Response Plan
MNC - Multi National Corporation
NADOPOD - Notification of Accident, Dangerous Occurrence,
Occupational Poisoning and Occupational Disease
OSH - Occuaptional Safety and Health
OSHA - Occuaptional Safety and Health Act
OSHMS - Occupational Safety and health Management System
PEL - Permissable Exposure Limit
PPE - Personal Protective Equipment
SHC - Safety and Health Committee
SHO - Safety and Health Officer
SME/I - Small and Medium Enterprise/Industry
TWA - Time Weighted Average
USECHH - Use and Standards of Exposure of Chemical Hazardous

vi
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX NO. TITLE PAGE
A Preview of Journal on SHC 23
B Preview of Journal on Industry Self Regulation 24
C Preview of Journal on Self Regulation 25

INTRODUCTION
2.1 OSHA
Labor protection is an ambiguous term where the definition used in common
language is different from that of legal terms/definition. In general usage, labor
protection is the protection of employees’ rights. But in legal terms, labor protection
is used to provide both safety and health protection to employees. According to
Krzyskow (2010), legal labor protection is law through an act enacted by the
parliament or congress.
The first known safety legislation was the Factory Act issued in England in
1802. Mohd Fadil, Norzita and Wijayanuddin (2013) states that during this time, the
safety philosophy was based on the idea that safety can be achieved through
regulations and supervision by the government. Krzyskow (2010) mentions that later
in 1919, ILO was founded and in its inception created the first set of conventions,
resolutions and constitution which contains the international law for OSH. The main
subject implied was not the protection of the health or life of the worker, but rather
protection of his or her working ability.
Mohd Fadil, Norzita and Wijayanuddin (2013) confirms the improvement of
OSH evolved when the Lord Robben Committee Report in 1972 introduced a new
safety philosophy for the responsibilities to ensure the safety and health at the
workplace lies with those who create the risk and with those who work with the risk.
Similarly, OSH legislation in Malaysia has also evolved positively from the Steam
Boiler Enactment in 1892 until the current OSHA in 1994 with the presently ongoing
additional regulations, codes of practice and guidelines to support and further
strengthen the act. One of the main principles for OSHA in Malaysia also embodies
similar philosophy to Lord Robbens Committee; which is self regulation. The
problem statement is; how well does the current regulations translate to self
regulation?

2
2.2 PMA Question
The PMA provided by Ir. Ludin Embong (2013) queries the following:
The aim of OSHA is to promote safety and health awareness and to establish
effective safety organization and performance through “self regulation concept”.
Analyze all regulations under OSHA and discuss whether the spirit of “self
regulation” is reflected through these regulations. Propose any improvement to
the regulations to reduce any gaps that may be present.
2.3 PMA Objective
The objective of this PMA is to analyze by performing the following:
(1) Specify definition of “self regulation” to be used in this PMA.
(2) Identify regulations that are reflecting “self regulation”.
(3) Recommend improvement to gaps and weaknesses discovered.
DEFINITION REVIEW
2.1 Self Regulation
Gupta and Lad (1983) identifies self regulation as a regulatory process at
industry-level as opposed to the government who sets and enforces rules and
standards relating to the conduct of the industry, MNC or SME/I. Ilise (1998) further
elaborates that self regulation can be achieved by employers by using best practices
as the minimum requirement or standard. The essence of self regulation is realized
in law through OSHA.

3
2.2 So Far as is Practicable
Self regulation in OSHA as one of the main principles is to handle issues
relating to occupational safety and health; employers must develop a good and
orderly management system. Starting with formation of a safety and health policy
and consequently employers have to make the proper arrangements to be carried out
(Siti Norfaizah & Mohd Zaidi, 2013). Based on the previous statement, employers
are the center of gravity to a successful self regulation of OSH. Therefore, the root
and most important section in OSHA regarding self regulation is Section 15
altogether with its subsections. Other noteworthy sections are Sections 16, 17, 18,
20, 21, 29, 30, 31 and 32 that relates to formulation of OSH policy, duty to other
person other than employees, duty of designers/manufacturers/suppliers, SHO, SHC,
NADOPOD, etc.
Throughout the abovementioned sections, there is a recurring correlation
where the duty of care is implemented so far as is practicable. OSHA states that
self regulation must be done so far as is practicable. But practicable is subjective
for everyone. What might be practicable to one party might not be practicable to
other parties. As far as legal terms explained in Part I–Preliminary–Interpretation in
OSHA, practicable means (Occupational Safety and Health Act, 1994):
(1) The state of knowledge about the hazard or risk and any way of removing
or mitigating the hazard or risk.
(2) The severity of the hazard or risk in question.
(3) The availability and suitability of ways to remove or mitigate the hazard
or risk.
(4) The cost of removing or mitigating the hazard or risk.

4
METHODOLOGY
2.1 Analysis Method
The method used is examining each OSH regulation by identifying
regulations that reflect the “self regulation” spirit. At the end of each regulation
analysis, aspects of self regulation will be categorized accordingly to fully self
regulation, partial self regulation or other suitable categorization. The self
regulations are then analyzed for practicability from the legal definition of
knowledge, severity, availability/suitability and costs towards hazards/risks.
3.2 Recommendation Method
In order to recommend improvements, there has to be gaps or weaknesses.
Referring to the last sentence in the introduction; how well does the regulations
translate to self regulation? The findings and room for improvement will be grasped
in the recommendation.
ANALYSIS OF REGULATION
4.1 Employers’ Safety and Health General Policy Statements Regulation,
1995
This regulation is not directly concerned with self regulation. It merely states
that employers having employees of 5 or less are exempted to formulate a safety and
health policy as in Section 16 of OSHA.

5
4.2 Control of Industrial Major Accident Hazards Regulations, 1996
The analysis of CIMAH regulation is shown in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1 : Self Regulation in CIMAH Regulation
REGULATION
REGULATION
SUMMARY
REFLECT SELF
REGULATORY
PRACTICABILITY
KNOWLEDGE
SEVERITY
CONTROL
AVAILABILITY/
SUITABILITY
COST
1 Citation and commencement. n/a
2 Application of CIMAH to industrial activities
and exempted industries and installations.
n/a
3 Interpretation of terms used in the regulation
from the aspect of legal definition.
n/a
4 Limitation of power of officer for sub-regulation
7(2) and 13.
n/a
5 Sub-regulation (1) (b) – manufacturer of
industrial activity must immediately rectify
imminent danger as soon as he becomes aware
of it.
Yes Yes Yes Yes No
Sub-regulation (1) (c) – manufacturer of
industrial activity must maintain a good
management system for controlling major
accident.
Yes Yes Yes Yes No
6 Application of Part II CIMAH to industrial
activities involved or likely involved with
hazardous substance.
n/a
7 Sub-regulation (1) (a) – manufacturer to
identify industrial activity.
Yes No No No No
Sub-regulation (1) (b) – manufacturer to
submit Schedule 5 to notify DG of industrial
activity.
Yes No No No No
8 Manufacturer to notify DG changes to
Schedule 5
Yes No No No No
9 Application for demonstration of safe
operation for non-major hazard installation.
n/a
10 Demonstration of safe operation. Yes Yes No Yes No
11 Review for demonstration of safe operation. No n/a n/a n/a n/a
12 Application for report on industrial activity
and preparation of emergency plan for major
hazard installation.
n/a
13 Registration of competent person by DG n/a

6
Table 4.1 : Continued
REGULATION
REGULATION
SUMMARY
REFLECT SELF
REGULATORY
PRACTICABILITY
KNOWLEDGE
SEVERITY
CONTROL
AVAILABILITY/
SUITABILITY
COST
14 Manufacturer to report Schedule 6 on
industrial activity.
Yes Yes Yes Yes No
15 Manufacturer shall report any modification of
Regulation 14.
Yes Yes Yes Yes No
16 Manufacturer to update report of Schedule 6
for every 3 years.
Yes Yes Yes Yes No
17 Review of Schedule 6 report by DG. No Yes Yes Yes No
18 Manufacturer to submit on-site emergency
plan to DG
Yes No No No No
19 Manufacturer to submit updated Regulation
18.
Yes No No No No
20 DG to review on-site emergency plan of
manufacturer.
No No No No No
21 Manufacturer to inform off-site emergency
plan to local authority.
Yes Yes No No No
22 Manufacturer to supply information to public
as per Schedule 3.
Yes Yes No No No
23 Notification of major accident Yes Yes Yes Yes No
24 Penalty for regulation offence n/a
S1 Hazard substance indicative criteria n/a
S2 List of substance and quantities n/a
S3 Items of information to be communicated to
public.
Yes Yes Yes Yes n/a
S4 Industrial installation. n/a
S5 Notification of industrial activity form. Yes Yes Yes Yes No
S6 Information to be included in the report on
industrial activity.
Yes Yes Yes Yes No

7
The CIMAH regulation that reflects self regulation with variable degrees of self
regulation includes:
(1) Fully self regulation: Regulation 5 and 7(1)(a).
(2) Partial self-regulation because reports that still have to be submitted to DG of
DOSH: Regulation 7(1)(b), 8, 10, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19 and 23.
(3) Partial self regulation with external responsibility towards local authority and
public: Regulation 21 and 22.
From the abovementioned, determining the practicability of the reflected self
regulation is mixed:
(1) Directly or indirectly guides to practicability in terms of state of
knowledge, severity of hazard and availability/suitability of control:
Regulation 5, 14, 15, 16 and 23; Schedule 3, 5 and 6.
knowledge and availability/suitability of control: Regulation 10.
(3) No guide for determining practicability in terms of cost: All.
(4) No guide for determining practicability: Regulation 7, 8, 18, 19, 21
and 22.

8
4.3 Safety and Health Committee Regulations, 1996
The analysis of SHC regulation is shown in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2 : Self Regulation in SHC Regulation
REGULATION
REGULATION
SUMMARY
REFLECT SELF
REGULATORY
PRACTICABILITY
KNOWLEDGE
SEVERITY
CONTROL
AVAILABILITY/
SUITABILITY
COST
n/a
3 Application of SHC under section 30 OSHA. n/a
4 Duties of employer. n/a
5 Membership of committee. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
6 Appointment of chairman and secretary of
committee.
Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
7 Appointment of other members of committee. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
8 Adequate employee representation. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
9 Vacancy. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
10 Sub-regulation (f) - Removal of member of
committee.
Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
11 Functions of committee. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
12 Inspection of place of work minimum of once
every three months.
Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
13 Investigation into any accident. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
14 Action to be taken on report and
recommendation of committee;
sub-regulation (3) – employer to keep the
record for a minimum of 7 years.
Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
15 Matters to be considered by committee. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
16 Investigation of complaint. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
17 Resolution of complaint. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
18 Assistance of committee. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
19 Rules on safety and health. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
20 Sub-committee. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
21 Frequency of meeting of committee. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
22 Duty to provide facilities. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
23 Inaugural meeting. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
24 Quorum n/a
25 Non-member may attend meeting n/a

9
REGULATION
REGULATION
SUMMARY
REFLECT SELF
REGULATORY
PRACTICABILITY
KNOWLEDGE
SEVERITY
CONTROL
AVAILABILITY/
SUITABILITY
COST
26 Matters to be dicussed at meeting. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
27 Minutes of meeting. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
28 Duty to ensure basic knowledge and functions
of committee.
Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
29 Duty to provide adequate training. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
30 Duty to make available relevant document and
information.
Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
31 Information not to be supplied n/a
32 Penalty n/a
The SHC regulation that reflects self regulation with variable degrees of self
regulation includes:
(4) Fully self regulation: Regulation 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17,18, 19, 20, 22,
23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30.
(5) Partial self-regulation due to appointment of chairman and number of
representatives based on number of employees: Regulation 5 and 6.
(6) Partial self regulation due to duration frequency to conduct regulation and
record keeping: Regulation 12, 14, 21 and 27.
regulation is not applicable for this regulation because the legal interpretation of
practicable in OSHA only refers toward hazards/risks and there is no aspects
regarding hazards and risk in this particular regulation. Ironically, the term
practicable; was used many times throughout this regulation.

10
4.4 Classification, Packaging and Labelling of Hazardous Chemicals
Regulations, 1997
The analysis of CPL regulation is shown in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3 : Self Regulation in CPL Regulation
REGULATION
REGULATION
SUMMARY
REFLECT SELF
REGULATORY
PRACTICABILITY
KNOWLEDGE
SEVERITY
CONTROL
AVAILABILITY/
SUITABILITY
COST
n/a
4 Duties of supplier to classify. No n/a n/a n/a n/a
5 Packaging requirements. No n/a n/a n/a n/a
6 Seal of package No n/a n/a n/a n/a
7 Labeling No n/a n/a n/a n/a
8 Dimension of label No n/a n/a n/a n/a
9 Duty of supplier to furnish Chemical Safety
Data Sheet
Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
10 Confidential information on chemical n/a
The CPL regulation that reflects self regulation is only Regulation 9.
Determining the practicability of the reflected self regulation is not applicable for
this regulation because the legal interpretation of practicable in OSHA only refers
toward hazards/risks.

11
4.5 Safety and Health Officer Regulations, 1997
The analysis of SHO regulation is shown in Table 4.4.
Table 4.4 : Self Regulation in SHO Regulation
REGULATION
REGULATION
SUMMARY
REFLECT SELF
REGULATORY
PRACTICABILITY
KNOWLEDGE
SEVERITY
CONTROL
AVAILABILITY/
SUITABILITY
COST
n/a
3 Application of SHO under OSHA. n/a
4 Registration of SHO. n/a
5 Application for registration. n/a
6 Qualification for registration. n/a
7 Certificate of registration. n/a
8 Compulsory attendance in any CEP for
renewal registration purpose.
n/a
9 Refusal to register SHO by DG. n/a
10 Duration of registration. n/a
11 Renewal of registration. n/a
12 DG may refuse to renew SHO registration. n/a
13 Cancellation of registration by DG. n/a
14 Employer to notify person employed as SHO. No n/a n/a n/a n/a
15 Employer to provide facilities, training
equipment and information for SHO to
conduct duty.
Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
16 Employer to permit SHO to attend CEP. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
17 Employer to provide someone to assist SHO
when conducting investigation.
No n/a n/a n/a n/a
18 Duties of SHO. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
19 SHO to submit report. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
20 Action taken towards report in Regulation 19. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
21 Death, sickness and absence from work of
SHO.
n/a
S1 SHO application form. n/a
S2 SHO renewal of registration form. n/a

12
The SHO regulation that reflects self regulation is Regulation 15, 16, 18, 19
and 20. Regulation 15, 18 and 19 is fully self regulation by employer and Regulation
16 is partial self regulation; employer has the freedom to determine what CEP the
SHO will attend. Determining the practicability of the reflected self regulation is not
applicable for this regulation because the legal interpretation of practicable in OSHA
only refers toward hazards/risks.
4.6 Use and Standards of Exposure of Chemicals Hazardous to Health
Regulations, 2000
The analysis of USECHH regulation is shown in Table 4.5.
Table 4.5 : Self Regulation in USECHH Regulation
REGULATION
REGULATION
SUMMARY
REFLECT SELF
REGULATORY
PRACTICABILITY
KNOWLEDGE
SEVERITY
CONTROL
AVAILABILITY/
SUITABILITY
COST
n/a
3 Application of USECHH. n/a
4 Duties of employer and self employed person. n/a
5 Register of chemical hazardous to health. Yes Yes Yes No No
6 PEL. n/a
7 8 hour TWA. n/a
8 Compliance with PEL using respirator. No n/a n/a n/a n/a
9 Assessment of risk to health. Yes Yes Yes Yes No
10 Review assessment. Yes Yes Yes Yes No
11 Assessment to be carried out by an assessor. No n/a n/a n/a n/a
12 Sub-regulation (2) Assessor to immediately
inform the employer if there is immediate
danger.
Yes Yes Yes Yes No
13 Assessment report. Yes Yes Yes Yes No
14 Action to control exposure. Yes Yes Yes Yes No
15 Control measures. Yes Yes No Yes No
16 Use of approved PPE. Yes Yes No Yes No
17 Engineering control equipment. Yes Yes No Yes No

13
REGULATION
REGULATION
SUMMARY
REFLECT SELF
REGULATORY
PRACTICABILITY
KNOWLEDGE
SEVERITY
CONTROL
AVAILABILITY/
SUITABILITY
COST
18 Design, construction and commissioning of
local exhaust ventilation equipment.
Yes No No No No
19 Records of engineering control equipment. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
20 Labeling and relabeling. No n/a n/a n/a n/a
21 Relabeling when hazardous chemical
transferred to another container.
Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
22 Information, instruction and training. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
23 Information, instruction and supervision to
anyone conducting work under this regulation.
Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
24 Employer will only use chemicals provided
with CSDS.
No n/a n/a n/a n/a
25 Provision of easily accessible CSDS. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
26 Monitoring of exposure. Yes Yes n/a Yes No
27 Health surveillance program. Yes No No No No
28 Medical removal protection. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
29 Warning sign. Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a
30 Retention of records by employer. No n/a n/a n/a n/a
S1 List of PEL n/a
S2 Chemicals for which medical surveillance is
appropriate.
n/a
S3 Information on pesticides. n/a
The USECHH regulation that reflects self regulation with variable degrees of
self regulation includes:
(1) Fully self regulation: Regulation 5, 9, 12, 15, 18, 19, 21, 23, 25 and 28.
(2) Partial self-regulation due to duration, frequency of duration or time for
submission: Regulation 10, 13, 14, 17, 22(3), 26(2) and 27(3)
(3) Partial self regulation with requirements to conduct/comply: Regulation
16(3) and 29.
regulation is mixed:

14
knowledge, severity of hazard and availability/suitability of control:
Regulation 9, 10, 12 and 14 .
knowledge and availability/suitability of control: Regulation 15, 16, 17
and 26.
knowledge and severity of hazard/risk: Regulation 5.
(4) No guide for determining practicability in terms of cost: All.
(5) No guide for determining practicability: Regulation 18 and 27.
4.7 Notification of Accident, Dangerous Occurrence, Occupational Poisoning
and Occupational Disease Regulations, 2004
The analysis of NADOPOD regulation is shown in Table 4.6.
Table 4.6 : Self Regulation in NADOPOD Regulation
REGULATION
REGULATION
SUMMARY
REFLECT SELF
REGULATORY
PRACTICABILITY
KNOWLEDGE
SEVERITY
CONTROL
AVAILABILITY/
SUITABILITY
COST
n/a
4 Exemption of incident from patient undergoing
treatment from NADOPOD.
n/a
5 Employer to notify and report accident and
dangerous occurrence.
No No No No No
6 Exemption from Regulation 5 n/a
7 Employer to report cases of occupational
poisoning and occupational disease.
No No No No No
8 Exemption from Regulation 7 n/a
9 No interference at accident or dangerous
occurrence scene except for certain conditions
mentioned in the regulation.
No No No No No

15
REGULATION
REGULATION
SUMMARY
REFLECT SELF
REGULATORY
PRACTICABILITY
KNOWLEDGE
SEVERITY
CONTROL
AVAILABILITY/
SUITABILITY
COST
10 Employer to record and maintain register of
NADOPOD.
Yes No No No No
11 Requirement of further information for
Regulation 10 by DG.
No Yes Yes Yes No
12 Amendment of regulation schedules n/a
13 Penalty n/a
S1 Serious bodily injury n/a
S2 Dangerous occurrence n/a
S3 Occupational Poisoning and Disease n/a
S4 Matters which DG may required to be notified Yes Yes Yes Yes No
The NADOPOD regulation that reflects partial self regulation is Schedule 4 of
Sub-Regulation 11 for the requirement of further information if noticed/required by DG.
The aspect of practicability does not considered cost in the particular schedule.
4.8 Analysis – Reflection of Self Regulation
Currently, the reflection for the spirit of self regulation for the regulations
under OSHA is shown in Figure 4.1 and the practicability of self regulation in terms
of legal interpretation/definition is visualized in Figure 4.2. In summary, out of the
197 regulations from the 7 arrangements of regulation; only 36 regulations reflect
full self regulation by the employer which results in only 18.27% of self regulatory
regulation of the overall regulations. In terms of practicability of the regulations, a
total of only 29.95% have outlined directly or indirectly the aspect of practicability
for the state of knowledge, severity of the hazard/risk and control
availability/suitability; none mentioning the consideration of cost.

Non Self Regulation,
Full Self
Regulation,
11.68
Partial Self
Regulation, 13.71
74.61
Figure 4.1 – Reflection of self regulation
Non Practicable,
70.05
Figure 4.2
State of
Knowledge, 11.68
Severity of
Hazard/Risk,
8.12
Control
Avaialability/
Suitability, 10.15
– Practicability of self regulatory regulations
16

17
RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Redefine “Practicable”
Practicability is the vital element in implementing self regulation. From the
regulations that reflect practicability, only 29.95% is practicable. The main culprit
for this predicament lies in the definition of practicable in legislation. The
interpretation of practicable in OSHA only regards hazard/risk. Whereas, there are
many circumstances in the regulations that mention practicability which has no
relation to hazard/risk. For example, SHC Regulation mentions numerous times the
establishment and implementation of SHC so far as is practicable; which has no
relation with hazard/risk whatsoever. This contradicts with the initial interpretation
of practicable of OSHA in the first place. The employer will ambiguously interpret
practicability to its own advantage.
To avoid broad connotation, “practicable” should be redefined in depth and in
greater detail which covers virtually anything in the regulations. Aspects of
practicabilty other than hazard/risk must be stated in the OSHA interpretation such
as:
(1) Arrangement of SHC.
(2) Provision of information, instruction and supervision.
(3) Arrangement of consultancy, assessor, competent person, etc.
(4) Arrangement of ERP.
(5) Arrangement of OSHMS.
(6) Arrangement of OSH related training, programme and activities.
(7) Arrangement of CPL.
(8) Arrangement of NADOPOD.
(9) Other aspects of self regulation that is not related to hazard/risk.

18
5.2 Thought Process
Self regulation by nature involves a certain level of initiative, additional
effort and proativeness. In a nutshell, self regulation requires a thought process to
lay the foundation of self regulatory enforcement by the industries. In reality, only
11.68% of the regulations under OSHA supports the self regulation setting that
Section 15 of OSHA soughts after. The 74.61% of the regulations are non self
regulatory and 13.71% are partially self regulatory. This setting conditioned by the
OSH legislation will definitely detriment and hinder the successful implementation
of self regulatory by employers.
The contradictory setting of the regulation towards Section 15 of OSHA not
only discourages self regulation but promotes complacency towards mental
compliance of the legislation for achieving the bare minimum requirements
stipulated. This defeats the purpose of continuous improvement fundamental in
OSHMS where the improvement stops when the legislation is complied to. The
thought process is neglected, diminished and not given consideration so long as the
minimum requirement of law is complied.
A solution is needed to overcome this quandary dilemma of regulations by
truly giving a level of freedom of action to implement self regulation. Some of the
potential solutions to overcome is by embedding thought process in the regulaitons
by:
(1) Outlining a guideline in the schedules to implement and arrange the
practicable aspects of applicable regulations and its’ sub-regulations.
(2) Establishing a generic thought process tool in the form of code of
practice for implementing the thought process.
(3) Installing more freedom towards self regulation by increasing self
regulatory regulations to at least 70% of the regulations.
(4) Improve and mend regulations that contradict with OSHA in terms of
self regulation.

19
5.3 Financial Implication
The most mind boggling finding in the analysis is the absence of cost
consideration throughout the regulations. Referring back to the interpretation of
practicable; cost is one of the aspects to be considered. Astonishingly, there is not
even one regulation that vaguely mentions on considering the factors of cost. Many
potential implications could rise such as employers defending that the cost allocated
in any OSH related matter is practicable when in fact is inadequate and insufficient.
As any typical employer, profit is the main drive for any business and increasing cost
in OSH matters will decrease the profit acquired.
Management guru; Drucker (1954) stated that economical factors as the main
drive for management. When financial implication is not given proper and grounded
rationality, it is not surprising when top management or employers does not consider
OSH as priority. Therefore, grounded economic rationality in the OSHA regulations
can be realized by:
(1) Setting a certain benchmark for the allocation of cost in the
regulations based on percentage. Of course, the golden value of percentage
must go through an in depth research with a holistic tripartite participation
from all industries and sectors that is agreed upon and endorsed by the
government. To give a rough idea, the following are just possible examples
of the outcome:
(a) OSH allocation with a minimum of 10% from total cost of
one-off projects for industries that are legally bound under CIMAH.
(b) 5% for industries not bound under CIMAH.
(c) 30% of employers training budget are for OSH training
purposes.
(2) Holistic consideration of OSH related cost not only regarding
hazard/risk embedded in the thought process mentioned in the previous
recommendation.

20
CONCLUSION
OSHA and it’s regulations in Malaysia have come a long way since the
Steam Boiler Enactment in 1892. The essence of self regulation is embodied in the
concept of so far as is practicable. Surprisingly, self regulation is only reflected
towards 11.68% of the regulations and only 29.95% of those regulations are
distinguishingly practicable. Recommendation for improvement to gaps and
weaknesses discovered for the regulations are; (1) Redefining the interpretation for
“practicable”; (2) Instilling a thought process and; (3) Establishing a grounded
economic rationality towards cost/financial implication. Alarmingly, we are near the
National OSH Master Plan as shown in Figure 6.1 to achieve self regulation by 2015
and continue on to the next outcome of preventive culture by 2020. Holistic tripartite
involvement is a must to ensure the realization of the master plan. If all goes well,
the OSHA and its regulations will reach a level of maturity for a strong foundation
for OSH in Malaysia. Of course, any man-made legislation is not perfect but there
must be an effort to continuously improve and enhance generally for the benefit of
OSH body of knowledge and specifically for Malaysians.
.
Figure 6.1: OSH strategic drivers for the national OSH master plan

21
REFERENCES
Department of Occupational Safety and Health (2004). Guidelines on safety and
health (notification of accident, dangerous occurrence, occupational
poisoning and occupational disease) regulations 2004. Malaysia: Ministry of
Human Resources.
Department of Occupational Safety and Health (2006). Guidelines on occupational
safety and health act 1994 (act 514). Malaysia: Ministry of Human
Resources.
Drucker, P.F. (1954). The practice of management. New York: Harper & Row.
Embong, L. (2013). Lecture notes. UTM KL: KLIA College.
Farouk, U.K., Richardson S., and Santhapparaj, A.J.S. (2011). Joint occupational
safety and health committees: Extent of functioning in Malaysian
manufacturing companies? Proceedings for International Conference on
Sociality and Economics Development. Singapore, 521-525.
Gupta, A.K., and Lad, L.J. (1986). Industry self-regulation: An economic,
organizational, and poitical analysis. The Academy of Management Review,
8 (3), 416-425.
Ilise, F.L. (1998). Self regulation: An American route to safety and health on the
cheap? The Safety and Health Practitioner. 16 (6), 34-36.
Kryzkow, B. (2010). Handbook of occupational safety and health – Edited by Danuta
Koradecka. Florida: CRC Press.
Malaysia (1994). Occupational safety and health act and regulations. 514.
Ministry of Human Resource (2001). National Occupational Safety and Health
Master Plan. Malaysia: Ministry of Human Resource.

22
Ministry of Human Resource (2001). National occupational safety and health master
plan. Malaysia: Ministry of Human Resource.
Mohd Fadil, A.W., Norzita, N., and Mohd Wijayanuddin, M. A. (2013). Safety
legislations in Malaysia. UTM-OCW lecture notes: Safety in Process Plant
Design. KL: UTM.
Siti Norfaizah, R., and Mohd Zaidi, J. (2013). Safety legislations in Malaysia, OSHA
1994 and other relevant acts. UTM-OCW lecture notes: Safety in Petroleum
Engineering. KL: UTM.

23
APPENDIX A: Preview of Journal on SHC

24
APPENDIX B: Preview of Journal on Industry Self Regulation

25
APPENDIX C: Preview of Journal on Self Regulation

3 pma salehuddin - analysis osh legislation

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (18)

Similaire à 3 pma salehuddin - analysis osh legislation

Similaire à 3 pma salehuddin - analysis osh legislation (20)

Plus de Capt(Rtd) Salehuddin Abdul Kadir

Plus de Capt(Rtd) Salehuddin Abdul Kadir (14)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

3 pma salehuddin - analysis osh legislation