In-Depth Analysis of Workplace Accidents in Food Processing Company in The Philippines

Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management Bangkok,
Thailand, March 5-7, 2019
In-Depth Analysis of Workplace Accidents in Food

Processing Company in the Philippines
Rex Aurelius C. Robielos, Kenn Redric P. Leyba and Charlene L. Ocampo
School of Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management
Mapua University
Intramuros, Manila
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Abstract
The study aims to investigate the causes of accidents among the food processing company in the Philippines by
analyzing 82 cases of accident reports which could help in the development of preventive strategies and safety plans
for companies in reducing the occurrence of workplace accidents. In order to perform an in-depth analysis of accidents,
the researchers first categorized the factors associated with the accidents based gender, age, type of work, shift, extent
of disability, accident type, body part affected, place of injury, nature of injury and other contributing factors. Then,
statistical analysis such as Cramer’s V test were performed in order to determine the significant associations among
factors considered in the study. Afterwards, task analysis using Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) is
employed to determine the detailed task, percentage of responsibility and the failure points that led to the accidents.
And finally, cause-responsibility analysis such as Occupational Accident Tree Analysis (OATA) and Occupational
Accident Component Analysis (OACA) were used in order to determine the root causes of accidents and identify the
percentage responsibility of worker and company towards the accident. The result of the analysis showed that place
of injury and contributing factors were the most significant factors that led to the accident of workers. These findings
helped the researchers in developing preventive strategies and safety plans for the companies to reduce occurrence of
accidents in the future.
Keywords
Workplace accidents, food processing, accident reports, safety plan
1. Introduction
Workplace accident is defined as the occurrence of an unpredicted accident in the workplace during the course of
employments that are caused by the hazards that are inherent in, or is related to it (Baktiyari et al., 2012). These
accidents are caused by various workplace factors (Khanzode et al., 2012) that resulted in loss of production, illness
or injury, or damage to equipment or property (Reese et al., 2006). According to the International Labor Organization
(ILO) statistics, about 317 million accidents occur at work every year, which made workplace accident a public priority
(Hajakbari, 2014). Many authors have investigated the importance of workplace accidents starting from different
perspectives through multiple approaches (Beland et al., 1991) and addressed workplace accidents in different
workplace groups (Mearns et al., 2000; Probst, 2002; Barling et al., 2003; Rundmo and Hale, 2003; Gyekye, 2005;
Håvold, 2007; Håvold and Nesset, 2009). The objective of workplace accident research is to understand accidents by
obtaining accurate and objective information about the causes of accident, so that these accidents can be reduced and
preventive measures can be designed (Jacinto et al., 2008 and Dotchev et al., 2008). However, the creation and
application of preventive measure depends on the type of industry and their corresponding activities.
In the Philippines, data shows that within major industry group, the manufacturing industry occupies the top place and
has the highest number of accidents with 23,641 (48.6% of the total) in 2013. More than one in five fatal accidents at
work in the Philippines took place within the manufacturing sector, resulted to a highest percentage share compared
to other sectors. Whilst, wholesale and retail trade sectors had a percentage increase of 11.8%, followed by
accommodation and food service sectors with 51.85% and construction with 37.82%.
© IEOM Society International
2515
A study of Lu (2014) showed the Philippines has increasing trend of occupational injuries in terms of frequency and
severity. However, due to lack of segregated information per sub-sector in the industry, exact number of accident cases
cannot be identified which make it difficult to come up with preventive strategies and safety plans. Similarly, the
reduction of accident in the manufacturing industry is not being studied much in the country. In the Philippines,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), is the agency responsible for collecting data and information
regarding occupational accidents, based on 2013 statistics, among all manufacturing industry, food processing has the
highest number of recorded cases of workplace injury.
Thus, this paper aims to investigate the causes of accidents among the food processing company in the Philippines by
analyzing 82 cases of workplace accidents in order to identify the factors that led to the accident which could help the
researchers in the development of preventive strategies and safety plans for companies in reducing occurrences of
accident and injuries in the future.
2. Methodology
The researchers collected data from food processing companies in the Philippines and a total of 82 accident reports
were gathered for the study. Initially, data from the reports were categorized based on factors such as gender, age, type
of worker, shift, extent of disability, type of accident, body parts affected, place of injury, nature of injury and other
contributing factors in order to fully describe the demographics and profile of cases of accidents and injuries occurring
in food processing companies.
Then, statistical analysis using Cramer’s V test was employed in order to determine the significant relationship
between associations of factors to the accident. In the study of Kurtz (1999) and Lyman et al., (1986), they stated that
significant associations between levels of factors were identified by Phi coefficients following the evaluation between
factors with multiple categories (Chi et al., 2006) to test the strength of association using Cramer’s V. The factors
associated with a significance level <0.05 made it possible to verify, with a 95% confidence level, relationship of
dependence between the variables analyzed (Castrillo-Rosa et al., 2017) in the study. To process and analyze the data,
the researchers used SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences V.25) software.
To further analyze the data gathered from the accident report, the researchers used Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
(FMEA) in order to determine the detailed task, percentage of responsibility and the failure points that led to the
accidents. And finally, cause-responsibility analysis such as Occupational Accident Tree Analysis (OATA) and
Occupational Accident Component Analysis (OACA) were used in order to determine the root causes of accidents
and identify the percentage responsibility of worker and company towards the accident.
3. Result and Discussion
Data obtained from 82 cases of accident reports were categorized and described in frequency distribution table as
shown in the table 1 below.
Table 1. Frequency Distribution on Accident based on Factors

2516
The reports showed that majority of the victims were male (64 cases, 78.05%), aged between 25-34 years old (38
cases, 46.34%), who mostly worked as an outsourced worker (51 cases, 62.20), in the night shift (52 cases, 63.41%).
The distribution of accident type among injured individuals also showed that the most common type of accidents was
related to slip and fall accounted for more than 23% of all accidents while struck-by only accounted for 18% of all
accidents. This was supported in the study of Lee et al. (2009) and Fabiano (2010), as stated that “falling/tumbling”,
in many cases associated with slip, represented always the first injury, causing accidents in the manufacturing industry.
Next, the injuries (the nature of injury and part of the body injured) were most commonly surface wounds and bruises
(21 cases, 25.61%) and lacerations (19 cases, 23.17%) caused damages in upper extremities (32 cases, 39.02%) and
the head (19 cases, 23.17%).
3.1. Result of Cramer’s V Test
Significant associations between all categorical factors of accidents were revealed by the Cramer’s V analysis. The
result is shown in the table below.
Table 2. Result of Cramer’s V Test
Significant associations between all categorical factors of accidents were revealed by the Cramer’s V analysis. Shift
was associated with place of injury and contributing factor; place of injury was associated with type of accident and
contributing factor and type of accident was associated with contributing factors. Since statistical analysis mainly
focused on the relationship between factors (Chi et al., 2006), they also proved on their study that using significant
associations were subjected to more analysis by means of Phi coefficient and Cramer’s V.
After applying Cramer’s V test, it was revealed that most number of associations were found between some other
factors, however only place of injury-contributing factors would be the focus for accident prevention. In other words,
the multi-linear event sequence of place of injury-type of accident, type of accident-contributing factor and place of
injury and contributing factor were all significant.

2517
As shown by solid lines in Figure 1, below the listed results of causes in place of injury-type of accident-contributing
factor links were the difficult access to machine controls and machine parts; insufficient/inadequate illumination; poor
design, construction, maintenance and installation; exposure to chemical substances; deficiencies in personal
protective equipment and poor housekeeping and cleaning are caused by type of accidents such as Caught-in;
Struckagainst; Caught-on and Contact-with on the part of Dispatching Area, Pump House, Repair Area and Smoke
House. Other significant type of accident-contributing factor links were insufficient/inadequate illumination with
Struckagainst accident type in Pump House, and exposure to chemical substances and deficiencies in personal
protective equipment with Contact-with accident type around Smoke House.
Figure 1. Place of Injury-Type of Accidents-Contributing Factor Links
On the other hand, significant associations between place of injury and type of accident and between type of accident
and contributing factor does not guarantee a significant association between place of injury and contributing factor.
For example, there are significant associations between Smoke House and Contact-with accident type
(𝜑𝜑 = 0.578 , 𝜌𝜌 = 0.024) and between Contact-with accident type and exposure to chemical substances (𝜑𝜑 = 0.708 ,
𝜌𝜌 = 0.019); deficiencies in personal protective equipment(𝜑𝜑 = 0.499 , 𝜌𝜌 = 0.038) and poor housekeeping and
cleaning(𝜑𝜑 = 404 , 𝜌𝜌 = 0.026), however, Smoke House was not significantly associated with Poor housekeeping and
cleaning. All these partial significant place of injury-type of accident-contributing factor links are indicated by a dotted
line in Figure 1.The results also proved in the study of Näsänen and Saari (1987 and 1989) that there is a solid link
between workplace housekeeping and workplace accidents.
After the method of place of injury-type of accident-contributing factor link, it can now be applied to identify the
causes of workplace accidents in terms of a certain place of injury, type of accident and contributing factors’
combinations. Subsequently, the results showed that place of injury and contributing factor were the most significant
among all the factors, this will now be the source to identify accident causes involved in workplace accidents inside
the food processing company in the Philippines. Investigating workplace accidents causes show that the most accidents
can be categorized into four factors such as shift, place of injury, type of accident and contributing factors. Based on
the results, insufficient/inadequate illumination, exposure to chemical substances, deficiencies in personal protective
equipment and poor design, construction, maintenance, installation are significantly associated to one another resulted
to having a solid line.
3.2. Result of Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA)
Another technique used in the study is the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) in order to identify all the
potential failure points obtained from Task Analysis. This was employed to minimize the risk associated (Puente et
al., 2002) with accidents at work and has been widely used in various manufacturing areas (Rhee et al., 2003; Dale et
al., 1990). The result of FMEA indicating the accident scenario, processes, failure modes, effects, the possible root
causes, and the form of multiplication of severity, occurrence, and detection of accidents is presented in the table
below. The researchers applied the technique on the 4 major cases of accidents as described below.
Case 1: Worker slipped and struck his left hand from the manual grinder
An experienced worker was repairing SPO molding machine at Pump House when the manual grinder accidentally
slipped and struck his left hand; the second case described a chemical exposure of ammonia suffered by a worker who
was pouring ammonia in the oil pot causing burns on his cheeks for the reason that his thin mask was not able to

2518
protect his face from the exposure; the third case described a worker who also suffered from exposure of ammonia
and accidentally splashed both his shoulders causing him a chemical burns; and finally, the fourth case described an
accident where a male worker was replacing the spiral of the Provatec machine and accidentally caught his hand on
the sharp edges of the machine cover causing him an avulsion.
Case 2: Worker caused a chemical burn on cheek while pouring ammonia

While the 45-year old male employee is pouring ammonia in the oil pot, his thin mask was not able to protect his face
from the exposure of the ammonia causing burns on his cheeks.
Case 3: Worker caused a chemical burn on both shoulders while pouring ammonia
A 50-year old male employee was pouring ammonia into the oil pot when accidentally the ammonia splashed and hit
both of his shoulders.
Case 4: Worker caught his hand on sharp edges while replacing the machine
A 22 years old male employee was replacing the spiral of the Provatec machine and accidentally caught his hand on
the sharp edges of machine cover causing him an avulsion.
Table 3. Result of FMEA for 4 Accident Cases

CASE PROCESS FAILURE MODE EFFECT Root Cause Severity Occurrence Detection RPN
SCENARIO
Score No. of Score Total
Score
cases
Get tools Wrong tools were taken Repair process won’t continue Tools has no label No injury 1 10 2 Visually 2 4
Wrong specification of tools Repair process won’t continue Tools has no label No injury 1 10 2 Visually 2 4
was taken
Wear proper No protective equipment was Employees are not allowed to enter Lack of knowledge No injury 1 38 3 Visually 2 6
worn the production area about safety Moderate 3 38 3 Visually 2 18
protective Wrong protective equipment Higher risk and more prone to Lack of knowledge Moderate 3 47 4 Quality 3 36
was worn workplace hazards about safety
Moderate 3 34 3 Quality 3 27
equipment Check Did not check for proper Employees has less chance of Lack of training Moderate 3 34 3 Quality 3 27
workplace environment identifying hazards and higher risk of Lack of knowledge
Case 1: Worker for proper Moderate 3 44 4 Quality 3 36
Did not check if it is safe to accident about safety
slipped and
struck his left start the repair of the machine Can cause failure and accident upon Lack of training
illumination Lack in safety knowledge starting the repair Lack of training
hand from the
manual grinder when repairing machine Can cause failure and accident upon
Check if it is safe to start Improper procedure in repairing starting the repair
repair and testing the machine Can cause accident both to the
Repair SPO workers and machine operator
Gives tools Wrong tools were given to the Repair process won’t continue Tools has no label No injury 1 9 2 Visually 2 4
worker Can cause machine failure and Lack of knowledge Moderate 3 11 2 Visually 2 12
Seal and make sure SPO Improper sealing of the occupational accident to the machine about proper procedure
is ready for operation in sealing of the Moderate 3 11 2 Visually 2 12
machine operator
machine
Did not seal the machine Machine won’t be allowed to enter Lack of knowledge
production about proper procedure
in sealing of the
machine
SCENARIO
No protective equipment was Won’t be able to enter production Lack of knowledge No injury 1 0 1 Visually 2 2
taken area about rules and
Get protective equipment Worn-out protective equipment Higher risk and more prone to regulations Moderate 3 0 1 Visually 2 6
in the pantry was taken workplace hazards (e.g. chemical
Company still provides
exposure)
worn out protective
equipment
Incomplete protective Higher risk and more prone to Lack of protective Moderate 3 26 3 Visually 2 18
equipment was worn equipment provided by
the company Moderate 3 26 3 Visually 2 18
workplace hazards (e.g. chemical
Worn-out protective equipment
Company still provides Moderate 3 12 2 Quality 3 18
was worn
Case 2: Worker exposure) Higher risk and more worn out protective
caused a Did not check for complete equipment Moderate 3 31 3 Visually 2 18
chemical burns protective equipment Lack of preparing a
prone to workplace hazards (e.g. Moderate 3 31 3 Visually 2 18
on cheek while
checklist for inspection
pouring Worked with an incomplete Moderate 3 11 2 Quality 3 18
ammonia protective equipment chemical exposure) Lack of protective
Make sure protective equipment provided by
equipment are complete Worked with a worn-out Employees will enter production with the company
protective equipment higher risk to accidents Company still provides
worn out protective
Guard checks workers Improper procedure in pouring Guarantee exposure to ammonia that
ammonia equipment
will cause burns to the employee Lack of knowledge
Check if you have all
protective equipment Guarantee exposure to ammonia that about safety
will cause burns to the employee
Pour Ammonia in the oil Can cause ammonia splash that can
pot cause burns if it contacts the body

2519
Sealed the oil pot improperly Ammonia can drip down cause burns Lack of knowledge in Moderate 3 0 1 Visually 2 6
to workers and product contamination proper procedure in
Seal the oil pot sealing oil pot
Did not seal the oil pot Ammonia can drip down cause burns Lack of knowledge Moderate 3 0 1 Visually 2 6
to workers and product contamination about safety
SCENARIO
No protective equipment was Won’t be able to enter production Lack in knowledge No injury 1 0 1 Visually 2 2
taken area about rules and
Get protective equipment regulation
in the pantry Worn-out protective equipment Higher risk and more prone to Company still provides No injury 1 0 1 Visually 2 2
was taken workplace hazards (e.g. chemical worn out protective
exposure) equipment
Incomplete protective Higher risk and more prone to Lack of protective Moderate 3 26 3 Visually 2 18
equipment was worn workplace hazards (e.g. chemical equipment provided by
exposure) the company Moderate 3 26 3 Visually 2 18
Make sure protective Worn-out protective equipment
equipment are complete was worn Company still provides
Higher risk and more prone to worn out protective
workplace hazards (e.g. chemical equipment
exposure)
Case 3: Worker Guard checks workers Did not check for complete Employees will enter production with Lack of repairing a Minor 2 12 2 Quality 3 12
caused a protective equipment higher risk to accidents checklist for inspection
chemical burns Check if you have all Worked with an incomplete Guarantee exposure to ammonia that Lack of protective Moderate 3 31 3 Visually 2 18
on both protective equipment protective equipment will cause burns to the employee equipment provided by
the company Moderate 3 31 3 Visually 2 18
shoulders while
Pour ammonia in the oil Worked with a worn-out Guarantee exposure to ammonia that Company still provides Moderate 3 11 2 Quality 3 18
pouring
pot protective equipment will cause burns to the employee worn out protective Moderate 3 10 2 Quality 3 18
ammonia
Improper procedure in pouring Can cause ammonia splash that can equipment Moderate 3 10 2 Quality 3 18
Check if it is safe to pour
ammonia cause burns if it contacts the body Lack in safety
ammonia
Did not check if it is safe to Can cause ammonia splash that can procedure
pour ammonia cause burns if it contacts the body Lack in knowledge
Lack in safety knowledge when Higher chance of accident while about hazards of
pouring ammonia pouring ammonia ammonia
Lack in knowledge
about hazards of
ammonia
Sealed the oil pot improperly Ammonia can drip down cause burns Lack of training and Moderate 3 0 1 Visually 2 6
to workers and product contamination safety procedures
Seal the oil pot
Did not seal the oil pot Ammonia can drip down cause burns Lack of training and Moderate 3 0 1 Visually 2 6
to workers and product contamination safety procedures
SCENARIO
Wrong tools was taken Repair process won’t continue Tools has no label No injury 1 10 2 Visually 2 4
Get tools Wrong specification of tools Repair process won’t continue Tools has no label No injury 1 10 2 Visually 2 4
was taken
Wear proper protective No protective equipment was Employees are not allowed to enter Lack in knowledge No injury 1 38 3 Visually 2 6
equipment worn the production area about rules and Moderate 3 38 3 Visually 18
Wrong protective equipment Higher risk and more prone to regulation Moderate 3 27 3 2 Quality 27
Make sure it is safe to was worn workplace hazards Lack in knowledge Moderate 3 27 3 3 27
remove the cover Did not check the edges of the Can cause cuts and scratches to the about safety Quality 3
machine before removing the employees upon removing the cover Lack if safety
cover Higher chance of accident while procedure about
Lack in safety knowledge when repairing the machine machine
repairing machine Lack if safety
Case 4: Worker procedure about
caught his hand machine
on sharp edges Replace spiral Did not replace spiral Machine won’t be allowed to enter Lack of training Minor 29 2 Visually 2 8
while replacing Improper procedure of production Lack of training Minor 29 2 Visually 2 8
the machine replacing spiral Failure in machine repair
Cover the Provatec Did not cover the Provatec Supervisor Lack of training Minor 2 42 4 Quality 3 24
machine machine Can cause cuts and scratches to Lack of training Moderate 3 42 4 Quality 3 36
Improper procedure in covering machine operator and to the next
the machine worker who will fix the machine Have a checklist for Moderate 3 44 4 Quality 3 36
Check the work done by Allowing the machine to enter machine checking
the workers Did not check the work done by production without being sure it is Moderate 3 44 4 Quality 3 36
the workers safe to be use Have a checklist for
Will allow the machine to enter machine checking
Lack of rechecking of the production by not making sure all
supervisor edges of the cover is smooth, high
risk of possible failure of the
machine, and higher risk of accident
to machine operator
The result of FMEA for revealed that the processes resulted to highest RPN are the following: For Case 1 - wear proper
protective equipment, check for proper illumination, check if it is safe to repair and repair SPO are the processes that
resulted to a highest RPN; Case 2 - make sure uniforms are complete, guard checks workers, check if you have all
protective equipment and pour ammonia in the oil pot; Case 3 - make sure uniforms are complete, check if you have
all protective equipment and pour ammonia in the oil pot; and for Case 4 - wear proper protective devices, make sure
it is safe to remove the cover, cover the Provatec machine and check the work done by the workers.
Similarly, many studies have been conducted regarding causes of workplace accidents (Boyd, 2015; Shao et al., 2014;
Cheng et al., 2013). However, fewer studies have been done on a person’s/organization’s role in accidents and
determine the responsibility percentage using qualitative techniques (Chen and Xia, 2012). Therefore,
2520
CauseResponsibility Analysis (CRA) techniques were used in the study to determine the responsible groups and
responsibility rate in an accident using two techniques such as workplace accidents tree analysis (OATA) and
workplace accidents components analysis (OACA). The result of the analysis is shown in the table 4 below.
Table 4. Result of Cause-Responsibility Analysis
The result showed that for case 1 and 2, worker has the highest responsibility rate on the cause of accident while the
company has the highest responsibility rate for case 2 and supervisor for case 4.
3.3. Development of Safety Plan
The results discussing accidents that occurred during the operations in food processing recommended several actions
to prevent similar accidents. Each case has results that brought out the importance of proper workplace instruction and
guidance such as introduction to safe methods, proper use of tools and safety devices given to all employees as well
as the hazards identification (Nenonen, 2011). The recommendations to improve safety in each case is given in table
below.
Table 5. Recommended Safety Measures for Food Processing
In the attempt to prevent human error from occurring in the workplace, pre- and post- task safety reviews should be
implemented. This is mostly applicable to Case 1 and Case 4 wherein, this approach helps by informing, involving,
and engaging workers to be more aware of the tasks to be performed, their hazards and risks, and the presence of error
traps or precursors (Wachter et al., 2014). Most of these tools work by improving the worker’s sense of awareness.
From the study of Rich et al., (2010), responsible groups should have enhanced their performance by allowing them
to continually learn and adapt from their work situations in order to be more aware with deficiencies within or changes
occurring in the workplace as they are the one who are more focused on responsibilities and emotionally connected to
the tasks that constitute their role (Wachter et al., 2014). This mediates by “improving” the performance of the safety
management system and increasing safety outcome performance due to its effectiveness in dealing deficiencies.

2521
Similarly, the concept of a prevention culture is implicitly use to Case 2 and Case 3 also stated in table above based
on the concept of a safety culture. The difference between prevention and safety culture is the latter aims to reduce
work-related risks and mostly address workplace level that is found mainly in high-risk industries and emphasized on
the protection of health, whereas the former emphasizes both the protection and promotion of health (Kim et al., 2016),
and requires to reduce risks in the workplace level by promoting technological improvements, compliance with
regulations and labor inspections, and introduction of an occupational safety and health management system, as well
as managed culture change to achieve a positive safety culture. This also includes workers at all workplaces.
4. Conclusion
The study applied statistical analysis and cause-responsibility analysis on 82 cases of accidents in a food processing
company to evaluate causes associated with all the factors given. A complete coding and classification was developed
to analyze and coded each accident in terms of the victim’s age, gender, the type of worker, shift, place, type and
nature of injury, body parts affected and contributing factors. Similar to the study of Chi et al., (2017), coding scheme
was able to identify factors contributing to the accidents. Contributing factors such as insufficient/ inadequate
illumination, exposure to chemical substances, deficiencies in personal protective equipment and poor housekeeping
and cleaning mostly have damaging effects on the workplace accidents were associated with place and type of injury
derived through analysis of Cramer’s V by applying multi-linear event sequencing method. With the support of the
practical information and tools of Task Analysis, FMEA and Cause-Responsibility Analysis, identification of hazards,
determination of accident causes, responsible groups and their role on accident as well as the responsibility rate (Jabarri
et al., 2016) were determined to enhance safety of workers. As a result of using Cramer’s V as well as the CRA
technique on the 82 cases the results confirmed that the study was well applicable to achieve the objectives of the
research. For responsible groups involved, the analysis of this research can be useful as a way of adding relevant
knowledge to the management of workplace safety (Carillo-Castrillo et al., 2013) and can be used among other risk
assessment, preventive plan and safety measures in any food processing company. Future researches may be extended
to assess the effectiveness of these tools by developing Probabilistic Risk Assessment and Fault Tree Analysis
approach particularly on the analysis of accidents.
References
Amorim, G., and Pereira, C.M. “Improvisation at workplace and accident causation - an exploratory study,” Procedia
Manuf., vol. 3, no. Ahfe, pp. 1804–1811, 2015.
Bakhtiyarim M., Delpisheh, A., Riahi, S., Latifi, A., Zayeri, F., Salehi, M., and Soori, H., “Epidemiology of
occupational accidents among Iranian insured workers,” Saf. Sci., vol. 50, no. 7, pp. 1480–1484, 2012.
Barlas, B., and Izci, F.B., “Individual and workplace factors related to fatal occupational accidents among shipyard
workers in Turkey,” Saf. Sci., vol. 101, no. October 2016, pp. 173–179, 2018.
Carrillo-Castrillo, J., Onieva, L., and Rubio-Romero, J., “Causation of severe and fatal accidents in the manufacturing
sector,” Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 423–434, 2013.
Castillo-rosa,J., Suárez-cebador,M., Rubio-romero,J. and Aguado, J., “Personal factors and consequences of electrical
occupational accidents in the primary, secondary and tertiary sectors,” Saf. Sci., vol. 91, pp. 286–297, 2017.
Cheng, C., and Wu, T., “An investigation and analysis of major accidents involving foreign workers in Taiwan’s
manufacture and construction industries,” Saf. Sci., vol. 57, pp. 223–235, 2013.
Chi, C., Yang, C., and Chen, Z., “In-depth accident analysis of electrical fatalities in the construction industry,” Int. J.
Ind. Ergon., 2009.
Chi, C., Chang, T., and Hung, K., “Significant industry – source of injury – accident type for occupational fatalities in
Taiwan,” vol. 34, pp. 77–91, 2004.
Doytchev, D. E., and Szwillus, G. “Combining task analysis and fault tree analysis for accident and incident analysis:
A case study from Bulgaria,” vol. 41, pp. 1172–1179, 2009.
Golinescu, R., Morosan, F., and Kazimi, M., “A probabilistic methodology for the design of radiological confinement
of tokamak reactors,” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 275–296, 1997.
Hintikka, H., “Accidents at work during temporary agency work in Finland – Comparisons between certain major
industries and other industries,” Saf. Sci., vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 473–483, 2011.
Hoła, B., and Szóstak, M., “An Occupational Profile of People Injured in Accidents at Work in the Polish Construction
Industry,” in Procedia Engineering, 2017.
Ja, C. and Onieva, L., “Organizational causes of accidents in manufacturing sector”. pp. 587–594, 2012.
2522
Jabbari, M., and Ghorbani, R., “Developing techniques for cause-responsibility analysis of occupational accidents,”
Accid. Anal. Prev., vol. 96, pp. 101–107, 2016.
Jacinto, C., Canoa, M., and Soares, C., “Workplace and organisational factors in accident analysis within the Food
Industry,” vol. 47, pp. 626–635, 2009.
Jørgensen, K., “Prevention of ‘simple accidents at work’ with major consequences,” Saf. Sci., vol. 81, pp. 46–58,2016.
Kim, J., “The Relationship Between Frequency of Injuries and Workplace Environment in Korea: Focus on Shift
Work and Workplace Environmental Factors,” Saf. Health Work, 2018.
López-Arquillos, A. and Rubio-Romero, J., “Analysis of Workplace Accidents in Automotive Repair Workshops in
Spain,” Saf. Health Work, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 231–236, 2016.
Lortie, M. and Rizzo, P., “The classification of accident data,” Saf. Sci., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 31–57, 1998.
Matsuoka,Y. and Fukushima,M., “Time zones, shift working and international outsourcing,” Int. Rev. Econ. Fin.,
2010.
Nenonen, S., “Fatal workplace accidents in outsourced operations in the manufacturing industry,” Saf. Sci., vol. 49,
no. 10, pp. 1394–1403, 2011.
Patwary, M., W. T. O. Hare, and M. H. Sarker, “Occupational accident: An example of fatalistic beliefs among medical
waste workers in Bangladesh,” Saf. Sci., vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 76–82, 2012.
Picchio, M. and Van Ours, J., “Temporary jobs and the severity of workplace accidents,” J. Safety Res., vol. 61, pp.
41–51, 2017.
Pietilä, J., Räsänen, T., Reiman, A., Ratilainen, H. and Helander, E., “Characteristics and determinants of recurrent
occupational accidents,” Saf. Sci., no. April, pp. 0–1, 2017.
Pillay, M., “Accident Causation, Prevention and Safety Management: A Review of the State-of-the-art,” Procedia
Manuf., vol. 3, no. Ahfe, pp. 1838–1845, 2015.
Salguero-Caparros, F., Suarez-Cebador, M. and Rubio-Romero, J., “Analysis of investigation reports on occupational
accidents,” Saf. Sci., vol. 72, pp. 329–336, 2015.
Saric, S., Bab-Hadiashar, A., Hoseinnezhad, R. and Hocking, I., “Analysis of forklift accident trends within Victorian
industry (Australia),” Saf. Sci., vol. 60, pp. 176–184, 2013.
Yi, K. and Lee, S., “A Policy Intervention Study to Identify High-Risk Groups to Prevent Industrial Accidents in
Republic of Korea,” Saf. Health Work, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 213–217, 2016.
Wachter, J. and Yorio, P., “A system of safety management practices and worker engagement for reducing and
preventing accidents: An empirical and theoretical investigation,” Accidents Anal. Prev., vol. 68, pp. 117–130,
2014.
Biographies
Rex Aurelius C. Robielos is the Dean of the School of Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management at Mapua
University. Before joining Mapua, he was Section Manager of Operations Research Group, Analog Devices General
Trias. He has a BS in Applied Mathematics from the University of the Philippines Los Baños, and a Diploma and MS
in Industrial Engineering from the University of the Philippines Diliman. He is pursuing Ph.D. in Industrial
Management (candidate) at National Taiwan University of Science and Technology in Taiwan. He is the current
Secretary of Human Factors and Ergonomics Society of the Philippines and Director of the Philippine Institute of
Industrial Engineers and Operations Research Society of the Philippines.
Kenn Redric P. Leyba is a graduate of B.S. in Service Engineering Management at the Mapua Institute of
Technology.
Charlene L. Ocampo is a graduate of B.S. in Service Engineering Management at the Mapua Institute of Technology.

2523

In-Depth Analysis of Workplace Accidents in Food Processing Company in The Philippines

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

In-Depth Analysis of Workplace Accidents in Food Processing Company in The Philippines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management Bangkok,

Thailand, March 5-7, 2019

In-Depth Analysis of Workplace Accidents in Food

© IEOM Society International

3. Result and Discussion

Table 1. Frequency Distribution on Accident based on Factors

© IEOM Society International

3.1. Result of Cramer’s V Test

© IEOM Society International

Figure 1. Place of Injury-Type of Accidents-Contributing Factor Links

3.2. Result of Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA)

© IEOM Society International

Case 2: Worker caused a chemical burn on cheek while pouring ammonia

Table 3. Result of FMEA for 4 Accident Cases

© IEOM Society International

Table 4. Result of Cause-Responsibility Analysis

3.3. Development of Safety Plan

© IEOM Society International

© IEOM Society International

You might also like