The concept of a safe work place principally dictates that an organisation should provide a conducive environment within its walls. In accordance with the rules and regulations of a safe workplace, an organisation should make sure the building or facilities that the workers work in are well repaired and the equipment safe and efficient. An organisation is also subjected to making sure all risks that workers might face are well protected, and in the same time provide conducive space to work in and for movement. In wet places, an organisation is meant to have good drainage that will protect the workers (Hopwood, Thompson, 2006). All the rules and regulations of safe workplace focus in making sure that the workers are well protected from the dangers that come with working at certain locations.
However, one of the issues that rationally and logically do not make sense is the lack of focus on the outer zones of the work place. According to the case study provided, the management still considered their organisations safe to work in even after the general population that lived near the company was affected. Logically, the rules that govern the safety of workers are intended to protect the worker both in and out of the workplace. The rules should not focus much on the luck of harm within the organisation walls, but also ensure that the public that live close is well protected. Based on the cases study, the organisations were still considered safe because no workers were injured. However, in a real sense the organisation was not safe, since it brought harm to the public that lived in proximity.
One can assume that the people affected were the families and friends of the workers, since people tend to live within closes distances of where they work. It is because of this that the rules and regulations should be reviewed to include the safety of the public that live within proximity.
Reference:
Hopwood, D., & Thompson, S. (2006). Workplace safety: A guide for small and midsized companies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
