This article was downloaded by: [185.55.64.

226]
On: 16 March 2015, At: 10:47
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:
Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Occupational Safety

and Ergonomics
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription
information:
[Link]

Accidents in Malaysian Construction Industry:

Statistical Data and Court Cases
a a
Heap Yih Chong & Thuan Siang Low
a
Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Published online: 08 Jan 2015.

Click for updates

To cite this article: Heap Yih Chong & Thuan Siang Low (2014) Accidents in Malaysian Construction Industry:
Statistical Data and Court Cases, International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 20:3, 503-513

To link to this article: [Link]

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content)
contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our
licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or
suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are
the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis.
The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,
claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the
use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can
be found at [Link]
International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE) 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3, 503
513

Accidents in Malaysian Construction Industry:

Statistical Data and Court Cases
Heap Yih Chong
Thuan Siang Low

Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Kuala Lumpur,

Malaysia

Safety and health issues remain critical to the construction industry due to its working environment and the
complexity of working practises. This research attempts to adopt 2 research approaches using statistical data
and court cases to address and identify the causes and behavior underlying construction safety and health
issues in Malaysia. Factual data on the period of 20002009 were retrieved to identify the causes and agents
that contributed to health issues. Moreover, court cases were tabulated and analyzed to identify legal
patterns of parties involved in construction site accidents. Approaches of this research produced consistent
results and highlighted a significant reduction in the rate of accidents per construction project in Malaysia.

accidents causes statistical data court cases construction industry Malaysia

 1. IntroductIon results of a common questionnaire survey in this
area of research. Therefore, recorded data were
The construction industry has been identified as retrieved for the years 20002009. The data were
one of the most hazardous industries in many parts collected from the responsible local government
of the world, as measured by work-related mortal- agency, the Social Security Organization
ity, workers compensation, injury and fatality (SOCSO). This supports the first objective of this
rates [1, 2, 3, 4]. Safety at work is a complex phe- research, which is to identify the causes and
nomenon and a subjective area of study. This is agents of accidents in the Malaysian
because industrial safety has undergone significant construction industry.
changes over the past decade [5]. However, the The construction industry is a complex practise
construction sector is notable as it continues to by nature due to fragmented working processes,
reg- ister a high rate of accident-related casualties. which involve many stakeholders. The
Con- struction workers who work within the responsibil- ities and obligations of each party
construc- tion industry face a greater risk of tend to overlap during the course of accidents due
fatality than workers in other industries [6, 7]. to unclear pro- visions or regulations in
To prevent accidents, one must know the causes construction contracts [11]. Legal liabilities need
of accidents in the working environment such as to be investigated and identified through court
inherently hazardous construction projects [4], cases related to safety and health issues in the
per- sonal and project factors [8], and construction industry. This could suggest
mechanisms or equipment that lead to accidents certain prevention techniques regarding
Downloaded by [[Link]] at 10:47 16 March 2015

[9, 10]. Statistical data are necessary to identify causation patterns identified from the cases and
the causes and agents of accidents in the descriptions of the accidents [12]. Thus, for the
Malaysian construction indus- try. The results second objective, a different research
would be more reliable than the approach is adopted to identify the legal patterns
of

Correspondence should be sent to Heap Yih Chong, Department of Construction Management, School of Built Environment, Curtin
University, Australia. E-mail: [Link]@[Link].
248 H.Y. CHONG & T.S. LOW

JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3

 CONSTruCTION INduSTrY ACCIdENTS 249
construction safety . [17]. Secondly, poor within the site, the
and health through communication and greater the
investiga- tion of H co- ordination possibility that
court cases. The a between accidents will arise
results arising from z management and [4]. The situation
the law are of a employees are becomes worse for a
utmost importance r causes of accidents more complex
to all parties d [18, 19, 20]. design of a building
involved in s Workers often come [22]. More
construction projects. from various complexity in a
Effective safety countries. Some do design tends to
approaches and The inherent hazards not speak or involve a greater
remedial actions and the nature of the understand the local likelihood of
may be taken to job performed by language. As a accidents in a
prevent and workers contribute to result, safety workplace, such as
minimize occupational injuries committees face falls [23]. Besides, a
reoccurrences in the [13]. There are three difficulties in com- construc- tion
future with help of types of hazard municating hazard project involves
Downloaded by [[Link]] at 10:47 16 March 2015

factual statistical which need to be areas and potential structural,

data. Moreover, recognized and accidents that may architectural,
participants in the controlled in all occur at the site [21]. bricklaying and
con- struction industries, especially Moreover, plumbing work, and
industry have to the construction workers tasks are monitoring and
learn and understand industry: chemical, repetitive in the evaluation. Each
applicable legal physical and construction kind of work is
rules. This research biological [14]. industry. The performed by a
can provide sources Physical hazards can construction industry specialized group of
for them to explore cause direct injury or also involves workers. Workers are
and understand legal internal bleed- ing to extensive movement trained in a
issues regarding a worker on a site of site workers specialized
safety and health, [15]. Negative within a workplace. construction; other
and their legal attitudes and The more movement types of equipment
liabilities and behavior discourage there is that are available
obligations. The many workers from might not be
combined results put- ting on their familiar to them.
demonstrate the personal protective Moreover, workers
behavior and equipment while tend to apply the
patterns of safety working on site [16]. same knowledge and
and health issues in Inconvenience is techniques even
construction sites. another reason for when the nature of
Ultimately, this may not putting on the project is
strengthen awareness protective different [24].
and moral obliga- equipment. Hence, there are
tions on safety and Nowadays, many potential
health issues in the contractors, who rely causes of injury to
Malaysian on insurance, tend to workers in a
construction pass on most of the workplace [4]. The
industry. responsibility for construction site
damages and consists of a lot of
liability to an sophisticated tools
2 insurance company and equipment.

JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3

 250 H.Y. CHONG & T.S. LOW
Qualified personnel damages for
only can operate this personal injury [25].
equipment. Many For there to be an
nonqualified award of damages,
operators suf- fer the injured party has
injuries caused by to suffer an actual
improper handling loss, be it personal
of equipment. This is injury, property
because an damage or financial
unqualified practi- loss arising from tort
tioner is not able to or contract law.
analyze a situation Criminal liability is a
and respond more serious offence
accordingly [21]. that involves
imprisonment and
more serious
3. punishment. With
Le construction-related
ga safety and health
L issues, criminal
LI liability mainly falls
ab into areas of gross
ILI negligence and
tI recklessness such as
es harm to an individual
or society [26]. This
Every worker
area of criminal
involved in a
liability is not a
construction process
major concern of this
must understand
their rights and
liabilities. The law
facilitates the
management of
safety and health in
a workplace [5]. If
an individual breaks
the law, they will be
the one personally
liable for the
consequences of
their actions. The
main distinction in
terms of liability
here is between civil
and criminal
liability. Civil
liability gives a
person rights to
obtain redress from
another person, e.g.,
the ability to sue for

JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3

CONSTruCTION INduSTrY ACCIdENTS 251

JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3

 252 H.Y. CHONG & T.S. LOW
research, the scope of which concentrates on civil 5. statIstIcaL data
liability as the normal scenario in Malaysia.
Moreover, civil courts are better at appraising In 20002009, SOCSO reported 656 555 acci-
appropriate financial sanctions compared to dents in all industries (6.5% of all accidents in
criminal systems [27]. industries) and 42 775 accidents in the
Malaysian construction industry. The data were
retrieved from the hardcopy of annual reports for
4. researcH approacHes the years
20002009 in SOSCOs head office. Yet, the
This research adopted two research approaches
online version was available and uploaded in the
from quantitative and qualitative analysis.
website from 2009 onwards [28]. Figure 1 shows
Factual statistical data and court cases were
the total number of accidents by gender. The
separated into groups for analysis. Qualitative
mean number of accidents for male was 3894
data of court cases were converted into
and for female was 384. Out of the total number
quantitative data to make the analysis easier and
of accidents, 890 were fatalities cases and 5985
more comprehensi- ble in the form of bar
were permanent disablement. Figures 23 show
charts, rather than in a descriptive form.
the number of death and permanent disablement
cases by gender. The number of accidents and
Downloaded by [[Link]] at 10:47 16 March 2015

the

5000
4588
4500 4456 4263
4189 4048
4000
3624 3643
3500 3390 3360 3374
Accidents

3000
male
2500
workers
2000
female
1500 workers
1000
500 417 404 427 391 397 336 296 343 364 465
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Year
Figure 1. Accidents by gender (20002009).

200

157
150
121 male
Fatalities

workers
100 92
84 84 female
77 73
61 62 workers
50 46

2 5 4 3 4 6 3 3 2 1
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
2009
Year
Figure 2. Death cases by gender (20002009).

JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3

 700

Permanent Disablement Cases

594 607
600 580 572
519 523 523 532
500 500 498

400 male
workers
300
female
200 workers

100 84
62 46 58 47 43 43 43 57 54
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Year
Figure 3. Permanent disablement cases by gender (20002009).

permanent disablement cases have a similar ratio accidents (17 106). U.S. Washington States
by gender, where there were less cases for Department of Labor and Industries defines a
female workers than for male workers. The floor opening as a ~31 cm or more opening in a
number of death cases decreased overall and floor, roof or platform, while a wall opening is a
involved fewer female workers only compared to ~76-cm-high and ~46-cm-wide opening in a wall
male workers. or partition through which persons may fall, e.g.,
Most reported cases involved male workers a window [29].
because of the relatively low number of female Accidents with trucks are extremely critical
workers on construction sites. Table 1 shows the (11 622 reported cases). Trucks are commonly
number of construction workers in 20002009. used for transporting loose material such as sand,
Only 9% of the total number of construction dirt or gravel for the construction industry [30].
work- ers were female workers; according to the They also deliver materials from suppliers to job
classifi- cation of the Department of Statistics sites, including reinforcement bars, bricks, tiles,
Malaysia of female (95 000 in 2010 and 103 300 timber and others. A recent study found that the
in 2011) and male workers (987 700 in 2010 number of fatal accidents of heavy vehicle
and 1 030 300 in drivers aged 2124 was higher than that of
2011) in the construction industry drivers aged
[28]. 60 and over [31]. The older the driver is, the

TABLE 1. Construction Workers (20002009)

Year TABLE 2. Agents of Accidents (20002009)
No. of workers
Agent
2000 759.900 Reported Cases
2001 829.800 Working environment 17 106
2002 905.100 floor and wall opening
2003 942.500 6774 stairs
2004 890.800 6036 confined space
2005 904.400 4296
2006 908.900 Transport and lifting equipment 12 570
2007 922.500 truck 11 622
2008 998.000 tower crane 653
2009 1015.900 lift 295
Other equipment 4205
5.1. agents of accidents ladder and mobile ramp 3386
scaffolding 819
Table 2 shows agents of accidents in the Malay-
Machines 682
sian construction industry. Agents such as floor
 and wall openings, stairs and confined spaces in earth moving machines, 682
the working environment category caused most excavating and scraping
machines
Downloaded by [[Link]] at 10:47 16 March 2015
 lower the fatality rate. Driver fatigue is also a The most common type of accident is stepping
leading contributor to roadway crashes. In gen- on, striking against or being struck by objects,
eral, fatigue affects driving performance and which happens when moving construction equip-
attention, and the driver may fall asleep while ment strikes or runs over workers. In 20052009,
driving. Drivers may have an inadequate amount there were 8997 accidents. Figure 4 shows a con-
of sleep because of prolonged working hours, tinuous increase in the number of accidents.
which cause fatigue [32]. Most cases of struck- According to the results, trucks are a top agent in
by accidents happened when a truck or dump the Malaysian construction industry.
truck was reversing [33]. Most fatalities were Falls are a critical cause of accidents with an
caused by vehicles without a reversing alarm. annual average of 1042 cases in Malaysia. Previ-
ous studies also pointed out that falls were the
5.2. causes of accidents most common type of accident in the construc-
tion industry [34]. According to the Occupational
Factual statistical data on causes of accidents
Injury and Illness Classification Manual, falls can
were investigated after examining the back-
be grouped into 11 categories [35]:
grounds and agents of accidents. Table 3 shows
causes of accidents for 20052009 according to falls from stairs or steps;
SOSCO data. Figure 4 summarizes data on acci- falls through existing floor openings;
Downloaded by [[Link]] at 10:47 16 March 2015

dents caused by various causes. The data pro- falls from ladders;
vided certain references and knowledge on the falls through roof surfaces;
causes of accidents as data for the past 5 years falls from roof edges;
falls from scaffolding or staging;
could not be compared to the 10 years data on
falls from building girders or other
the agents of accidents.
structural steel;
falls while jumping to a lower level;
TABLE 3. Causes of Accidents (20052009)
falls through existing openings;
Causes
Reported Cases
Stepping on, striking against or
8997 falls from floors, docks or ground level;
struck by object
other nonclassified falls to lower levels.
Falls 5209
Other types of accidents 2450 The third highest group of accidents is the
Caught in between objects 1855 group including other nonclassified types of acci-
Overexertion or strenuous 684 dents such as structure collapse, electrocution,
movements fire, drowning, explosion and toxification. This

2000
1963
1800 1959
1701 1826
1600
1548 stepping on, striking or
1400
being struck by
objects
1200
Accidents

1157 falls
1085 1063
1000 other types of accident
984 920
800 caught in between
objects
592 565 533
600 over-exertion or
420 485
400 295 strenuous movements
310 393
437
200
90 51 186 197 160
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
 Years
Figure 4. Causes of accidents (20002009).
 group has an average of 490 reported cases per or appealed against the employee. There was one
year. case from other allegations between the parties
Accidents involving being in between objects such as the subcontractor and contractor, licensee
were reported 371 times per year (1855 in total and occupier, occupier and employee, etc. These
for 20052009). These accidents were usually cases could be categorized into four levels of
caused by being buried inside a hole or trench. In injuries, i.e., minor injury, major injury, disable-
most situations, the soil collapsed and trapped ment and death. The cases with different levels
workers. This kind of accident attracts attention of injuries are broadly similar. There were
of the public. seven cases of minor injury, seven cases of
Overexertion or strenuous movements are disablement, seven cases of death and nine
another type of accidents in industry. A com- cases of major injury. Within 30 cases, the
pressed work program and delays in a project proportions of both plaintiffs and defendants
schedule are the reasons of accidents. Figure 4 winning their cases were almost even with 12
shows that the number of accidents caused by and 11 cases, respec- tively. Seven cases were
overexertion or strenuous movements increases upheld by the courts as contributory negligence.
(137 cased on average each year). Contributory negligence is a partial defence to a
claim brought against a construction
professional. The professional may have been in
Downloaded by [[Link]] at 10:47 16 March 2015

6. court cases
breach of duty but may also be able to argue that
Data on 30 court cases were retrieved from the the claimant was partially the author of
Malayan Law Journal and related reports in misfortune by failing to take reasonable care to
Lexis-Nexis. Selected court cases were related to protect themself [36]. Therefore, both a plaintiff
Malaysian construction safety and health issues and a defendant have to bear the responsibility of
in 19612011. Most court cases were civil suits the consequences but with a different proportion
(12 cases). Cases which were brought to the of responsibilities, depending on the circum-
Court of Appeal and Supreme Court were the stances and evidence.
least numerous (two cases in each court). Cases
brought to the Federal Court and the High Court 6.1 causes of accidents
of Malaysia were nine and five, respectively. Figure 5 shows causes of accidents at the con-
There were 14 claims involving an employee struction site. Nine causes were categorized and
(plaintiff) and an employer (defendant). There analyzed. Accidents caused by incorrect use or
were seven cases in which the employer claimed poor maintenance of material and equipment
were the most common (14 cases), followed by

fall 13
machinery & equipment error
14
being struck 10
Cause of Accidents

vehicle error 3
fire 3
loading & unloading error
3 collapse 3
flood 2
explosion 1
gaseous fumes and vapor
1 improper storage of material
1 nervous shock 1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Number of Accidents
Figure 5. Causes of accidents in Malaysia.
JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3
 falls (13 cases), being struck (10 cases) and acci- 7. dIscussIon
dents caused by collapse of building structures (3
cases). The results are similar to the statistical The factual statistical data retrieved from the
data obtained from SOSCO, which confirmed Department of Occupational Safety and Health
and strengthened the analysis of causes of acci- (DOSH) cannot indicate the actual and absolute
dents in the Malaysian construction industry construction safety and health scenario in Malay-
[28]. sia. The number of reported accidents needs to be
compared with the total number of construction
6.2. penalties and compensation projects in an individual year. This could demon-
strate trends and an accurate ratio of accidents in
Figure 6 illustrates the range of penalties and
the Malaysian construction industry. The data-
compensation which was calculated and deter-
base on construction projects was retrieved from
mined in the various judgements by courts of
the Construction Industry Development Board
Malaysia. The party that was held liable would
(CIDB), which registers all construction projects
have to pay the amount to the other party. The
in Malaysia. The construction projects are
penalties tend to be monetary compensation. The
catego- rized as residential projects,
most common amount of compensation ranged
nonresidential projects, mixed developments,
from 3101 to 15 500 USD and was charged in
social amenities, infrastructure and others. Figure
Downloaded by [[Link]] at 10:47 16 March 2015

11 out of 30 cases. In two case only

7 shows the ratio of the total number of
compensation ranged from 622 001 to 933 000
accidents recorded by DOSH compared to the
USD. Penalties were not specified in three cases.
total number of projects registered in Malaysia
by CIDB in 20002009.

12 11
10
Accidents

6
6
4 4 4
3
2
0

Penalty/Compensation (USD)
Figure 6. Penalties and compensation charged in Malaysian cases.

1.2

1.0

0.8
Accidents

0.6
ratio
0.4

0.2

0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Year
Figure 7. Accidents compared to total number of projects.

JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3

 The number of accidents increased within 10 work, provide adequate equipment, and recruit
years and amounted to 0.82 accident per project. competent and safety-conscious staff. If an
The highest accident rate in construction projects employer fails to take reasonable care in any of
was in 2000 with 1.10 cases per project. Then, these areas, an employee has certain legal claims
the accident rate began to decrease until the and may be able to resign and claim constructive
lowest point in 2007 with 0.5 accident per unfair dismissal and personal injury. Meanwhile,
project; the possibility of an accident was 50%. an employer, as the occupier of the premises, has
The accident incident rate (total number of both physical possession and control over the
accidents 200 000/h worked by all employees) area where workers are working at the time of
decreased from 0.64 to the accident and if it is proved that an employer
0.40 in 20002009. Meanwhile, fatal accident had breached statutory duty, his employer may
8
rate (number of fatalities 10 /total h worked be lia- ble for contributory negligence.
by all employees) also significantly decreased The approaches of this research influence the
from
behavior and trends of construction safety and
10.5 to 2.31 over 10 years of 20002009. The
health issues in Malaysia. Most causes of acci-
number of permanent disablement cases
dents belong to two categories: striking against
remained high (642 cases in 2000, 691 cases in
or being struck by objects. These two
2009) and was further investigated. This was the
Downloaded by [[Link]] at 10:47 16 March 2015

categories require further discussion and

limitation of this research. The trend in
examination.
construction safety and health is improving and
A cross-examination with other countries was
heading in a positive direction according to the
also carried to have a clear reference point or to
overall analysis of
see a trend for Malaysian construction safety and
20002009. There is an improvement in safety
health. The comparison was based on the cases
effectiveness in the Malaysian construction
reported in DOSH against the results from the
industry, which is the result of the growth and
existing literature. Table 4 shows a comparison
establishment of enacted laws and regulations,
of the total number of cases of striking against
professional practises, safety policies, and
or being struck by objects, and falls. The number
defined management plans and strategies.
of reported accidents was high in various
The second approach of this research was
countries in categories striking against or being
based on analysis of court cases under the
struck by objects, and falls. The findings show
statute law and included common law
that striking against or being struck by objects
jurisprudence. All employers are obliged to
ranked higher than falls in Taiwan, Spain, New
protect their employees under common law. This
York and Malaysia, but not in Korea and China.
extends into all employ- ment contracts and
Neverthe- less, these two causes are the most
employers responsibility to take care of their
dangerous hazards in construction accidents in
employees safety and health. Employers will
all countries. This shows that over 50% of all
be liable for their negligence, vicarious liability
accidents in
and contributory negligence. An employer is
industry were related to these two categories,
obliged to provide a safe place of work, to
provide and maintain a safe system of

TABLE 4. Comparison of Accident Categories: Striking Against or Struck by Objects and Falls
Striking Total Accidents
Study Country Year Against or Falls or
Tam, Zeng & Deng [37] China 1999 Struck
24.2 by 48.4 Cases2 319
1
Mohan & Zech [38] USA 19902001 43.3 18.7 2 161
Lopez, Fontanada & Spain 19902000 40.4 20.9 630 452
Alcantara [39]
Im, Kwon, Kim, et al. [40] Korea 19972004 16.8 54.1 4 333
Cheng, Lin & Leu [3] Taiwan 20002007 73.0 * 59.0 * 1 347
No study Malaysia 20052009 46.9 27.1 19 195
Notes. * overlapping areas; 1 = data for New York, NY.
 even though the industry. The legal patterns of the 2. Ling FYY, Liu
statistical results research outcomes of parties involved in M, Woo YC.
varied in terms of the approach the Malaysian Construction
data collection and complement each construction industry. fatalities in
The findings could Singapore.
years. The results other. The causes of
help to raise safety International
confirm that the construction
Journal of
causes of accidents accidents are mainly aware- ness and
Project
in the Malaysian striking against or provide useful Management.
con- struction being struck by references for 2009;27(7):717
industry are similar objects, and falls but further effective 26.
to the causes of the judgments of safety precautions 3. Cheng CW,
accidents in other court cases are even and management Lin CC, Leu
construction for plain- tiffs and plans (root causes of SS. Use of
industries. Thus, a defendants, and construction association
continuing search involve critical accidents, con- rules to
for innovative and injuries and death struction related explore
legislation). The causeeffect
effective safety issues.
relationships
management plans Certain limitations results can help to
Downloaded by [[Link]] at 10:47 16 March 2015

in
or precaution and improve the working occupational
methods is necessary recommendations environment and accidents in
for the whole need to be produc- tivity in the Taiwan
construction highlighted. The Malaysia construction
industry, particularly limited number of construction industry. industry. Saf
for these two court cases provides Sci.
categories of a better perspective 2010;48(4):436
r 44.
accidents. of safety and health
e 4. Pinto A, Nunes
issues. It does not
f IL, Ribeir RA.
represent the whole
8 e Occupational
liti- gation behavior. risk assessment
. r
Statistical data in construction
e
should be investi- industry
c n
gated because of overview and
o c
changes in reection. Saf
n e Sci. 2011;49(5):
technologies and
c s 61624.
practises in the
L 5. Badri A,
construction 1. Hassanein AA,
u Gbodossou A,
industry. Therefore, Hanna RS.
s Nadeau S.
the actual situation Safety
I programmes in Occupational
of construction
o the Egyptian health and
safety and health safety risks:
n construction
issues could be towards the
s industry. Int J
identified. This is a integration
Inj Contr Saf
limita- tion of this into project
Promot.
The analysis of research. 2007;14(4):251 management.
Nevertheless, the 7. Saf Sci.
statistical data and
combined results 2012;50(2):1
court cases 908.
contributes to safety meet the research
objectives by 6. Aksorn T,
and health in the Hadikusumo
Malaysian identify- ing the
BHW. Critical
construction factual root causes of
success factors
site accidents and the
 influencing construction 4th eventual
safety program industry: a hazard. Internet
performance Hong Kong Journal of Food
in Thai study. Saf Sci. Safety.
construction 2011;49(2):208 2005;6:510.
projects. Saf 15.
Sci. 11. Chong HY, Zin
2008;46(4):70 RM. A case
927. study into the
7. Bansal VK. language
Application of structure of
geographical construction
information standard form
systems in in Malaysia.
construction International
safety Journal of
planning. Project
International Management.
Journal of 2010;28(6):601
Project 8.
Management. 12. Grcanli GE.
2011;29(1):66 Who is at
77. fault? Third
8. Kines P, party and
Andersen LP, child injuries
Spangenberg at
S, Mikkelsen construction
KL, Dyreborg sites in
J, Zohar D. Turkey. Saf
Improving Sci.
construction 2009;47(3):36
site safety 473.
through leader- 13. Khanzode
based verbal VV, Maiti J,
safety Ray PK.
communicatio Injury count
n. J Safety model for
Res. quantificatio
2010;41(5):39 n of risk of
9406. occupational
9. McCann M. injury. Int J
Heavy Inj Contr
equipment Saf Promot.
and truck- 2011;18(2):1
related deaths 5162.
on 14. Sekheta MA,
excavation Sahtout AH,
work sites. Sekheta NF,
J Safety Res. Kapkovic M,
2006;37(5):511 Pantovic N.
7. The HACCP
10. Tam VWY, implementation
Fung IWH. and the mental
Tower crane illness of food
safety in the handlers as the
 15. Burrows W, safety. Manag. New York,
editor. Human International 2005;131(9):102 NY, USA:
diseases. In: Journal of 936. Thomson
Britannica Project 23. Navon R, Delmar
Encyclopedia Management. Kolton O. Learning;
Online. 2005;23(4):329 Model for 2008.
Retrieved July 41. automated 26. Johnson CW.
21, 2014, from: 19. Lauver KJ. monitoring of Ten
[Link] Human fall hazards in contentions of
annica. resource safety building corporate
com/EBchecke practices and construction. J manslaughter
d/topic/275628/ employee Constr Eng legislation:
humandisease/6 injuries. Journal Manag. 2006; public policy
3229/Physical- of Managerial 1 and the legal
injury. Issues. 3 response to
16. Dedobbeler 2007;19(3):397 2 workplace
N, Bland F. 413. ( accidents. Saf
A safety 7 Sci.
20. Hsu SH, Lee
climate ) 2008;46(3):349
CC. Safety
:
Downloaded by [[Link]] at 10:47 16 March 2015

measure for management in 70.

construction 7
a relationship- 27. Mekos KZ.
sites. J Safety 3
oriented Complaint
3
Res. culture. reports for

1991;22(2):97 International violations of
4
103. Journal of health and
0
17. Lingard H, Occupational . safety
Rowlinson S. Safety and legislation in
24. Podgrski D.
Behavior- Ergonomics the area
The use of tacit
based safety (JOSE). knowledge in
management 2012;18(1):35 occupational
in Hong 45. Retrieved safety and
Kongs July 21, 2014, health
construction from: management
industry. J [Link] systems.
Safety Res. [Link]/50491. International
1997; 21. Haslam RA, Journal of
2 Hide SA, Gibb Occupa- tional
8 AGF, Gyi DE, Safety and
( Pavitt T, Ergonomics
4 Atkinson S, et (JOSE).
) al.
: 2010;16(3):
Contributing 283310.
2
factors in Retrieved
4
construciton July 21,
3
accidents. Appl 2014,

5 Ergon. from:
6 2005;36(4):401 [Link]
. 15. .[Link]/37
22. Gambatese JA, 944.
18. Teo EAL, Ling
FYY, Chong AFW. Behm M, Hinze 25. White NJ.
Framework for JW. Viability of Construction
project designing for law for
managers to construction managers,
manage worker safety. J architects and
construction Constr Eng engineers.
 of Thessaloniki Occupational Statistics.
(Greece). Saf Safety and Occupational
Sci. 2010; Ergonomics Injury and
48(2):20914. (JOSE). Illness
28. Social 2010;16(1):55 Classification
Security 67. Retrieved Manual.
Organization July Washington,
(SOCSO). 21, 2014, from: WA, USA: U.S.
Annual Report [Link] Department of
2009. Labuan, pl/35528. Labor, Bureau
Indonesia: 31. Duke J, Guest of Labor
Social Security M, Boggess M. Statistics; 2012.
Organization Age-related Retrieved July
(SOCSO). safety in 21,
Retrieved July professional 2014, from:
21, 2014, from: heavy vehicle [Link]
[Link] drivers: a ov/iif/
[Link] literature [Link].
/images/Lapora review. Accid 36. Patten B.
n_ Anal Prev. Professional
Tahunan_2009_ 2010; negligence in
[Link]. 42(2):36471. construc- tion.
29. Washington 32. Akerstedt T. London, UK;
State Consensus Taylor &
Department of statement: Francis; 2003.
Labor and fatigue and 37. Tam CM, Zeng
Industries. accidents in SX, Deng ZM.
Safety and transport Identifying
health core operations. elements of
rules. J Sleep Res. poor
Washington, 2000;9(4):395. construction
WA, USA: 33. Hinze JW, safety
Washington management in
Teizer J.
State Visibility- China. Saf Sci.
Department of 2004;42(7):
related fatalities
Labor and related to 56986.
Industries;
construction 38. Mohan S, Zech
2014. Retrieved equipment. Saf WC.
July 21, 2014,
Sci. Characteristics
from: 2011;49(5):709 of worker
[Link]
18. accidents on
[Link]/Safet
34. Huang X, Hinze NYSDOT
y/Rules/chapter/
J. Analysis of construction
800/ WAC296-
construction projects. J Saf
[Link].
worker fall Res.
30. Bohm J, Harris 2005;36(4):353
accidents. J
D. Risk Constr Eng 60.
perception and
Manag.
risk-taking 2003;129(3):262
behavior of 71.
construction
site dumper 35. U.S.
drivers. Department of
International Labor, Bureau
Journal of of Labor
 39. Caimino 40. Im HJ,
Lpez Kwon YJ, Kim
MA, SG, Kim YK,
Fontaned Ju YS,
a RI, Lee HP.
Alcantar The
a OJG. characteri
Construc stics of
tion fatal
industry occupation
accidents al injuries
in Spain. in Koreas
J Saf constructio
Res. n industry,
2008; 1997
39(5):49 2004. Saf
7507. Sci.
2009;47(8
):
1
Downloaded by [[Link]] at 10:47 16 March 2015

1
5
9

6
2
.