Electric power facilities traditionally demonstrate high rates of the fatal injuries. At the same time, the share of technical causes of injuries decreases annually. To reduce occupational injuries, the most promising measures are aimed at decreasing the influence of organizational and psychophysiological causes. Each of the potential causes of an injury can be described by the indicators that are uniquely associated with the work-related injuries and characterize the injured employee.
The purpose of the study is to determine the characteristics of the employees in the most traumatic professions in the electric power industry who suffered as the result of injuries with fatality. Methodological approach is proposed related to the determination of the characteristic parameters of employees of the operating and maintenance personnel in the electric power industry. It consists of several stages. The first is the formation of the most common parameters, assignment to the group with an increased risk of industrial injuries. The second is the definition of a list of the most traumatic professions in the electric power industry. The third is the introduction of a procedure for multivariate cluster analysis of the input statistical data. The fourth is the calculation of the parameters of employees of the most traumatic professions in the electric power industry with distribution by cluster groups. Cluster groups are formed for professions: electrician, electrical fitter, foreman and wireman, which account for 80 % of the fatal injuries in the electric power industry. The relevant characteristics of the employees are determined: age, length of service, period after testing knowledge on the occupational safety, class of the working conditions.
The proposed methodological approach can be used for any industry where the employee is exposed to the harmful and hazardous production factors. The methodology allows to develop and carry out measures for reducing the level of injuries.
2. Loktionov O.A., Kondrateva O.E. Improving Approaches to the Analysis of Injury Rate at the Industrial Enterprises. Bezopasnost Truda v Promyshlennosti = Occupational Safety in Industry. 2020. № 11. pp. 76–81. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24000/0409-2961-2020-11-76-81
3. Narine G. Human Factors in Electrical Power Industry Accident Prevention. International Journal of Engineering and Technical Research. 2020. Vol. 10. Iss. 5. pp. 27–37. DOI: 10.31873/IJETR.10.5.89
4. Gammon T., Vigstol D., Campbell R. Workers at Risk of Fatal and Nonfatal Electrical Injuries. IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications. 2019. Vol. 55. Iss. 6. pp. 6593–6602. DOI: 10.1109/TIA.2019.2936391
5. Lee E.W.J., Zheng H., Aung H.H., Seidmann V., Li C., Aroor M.R., Lwin M.O., Ho S.S., Theng Y.-L. Examining organizational, cultural, and individual-level factors related to workplace safety and health: A systematic review and metric analysis. Health Communication. 2021. Vol. 36. Iss. 5. pp. 529–539. DOI:10.1080/10410236.2020.1731913.
6. Filippova N.S., Volokhina A.T., Glebova E.V. Analysis of the influence of various factors on statistical indicators of industrial injures at the fuel and energy facilities. Bezopasnost zhiznedeyatelnosti = Life Safety. 2020. № 4 (232). pp. 3–11. (In Russ.).
7. Kondrateva O.E., Kravchenko M.V., Loktionov O.A. Development of the Methods for Assessing the Risk of Damage to Health of the Employees of the Electric Power Industry. Bezopasnost Truda v Promyshlennosti = Occupational Safety in Industry. 2019. № 4. pp. 63–68. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24000/0409-2961-2019-4-63-68
8. Sheehan C., Donohue R., Shea T., Cooper B., De Cieri H. Leading and lagging indicators of occupational health and safety: The moderating role of safety leadership. Accident; Analysis and Prevention 2016. Vol. 92. pp. 130–138. DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2016.03.018
9. Ivanov V. Risk factors: to the issue of expert prediction of the occupational injuries at the workplace. Available at: http://www.kiout.ru/info/publish/29098 (accessed: March 18, 2022). (In Russ.).
10. Mikhina T.V. Long-range forecasting of industrial injuries (Methodological approaches). Okhrana i ekonomika truda = Occupational Safety and Economics. 2012. № 4 (9). pp. 65–75. (In Russ.).
11. Sevastyanov B.V., Shadrin R.O. Forecasting the number of fatal victims and indicators of the occupational illness in the energy sector of the Udmurt Republic. Vestnik IzhGTU imeni M.T. Kalashnikova = Bulletin of Kalashnikov ISTU. 2012. № 1 (53). pp. 102–104. (In Russ.).
12. Kondrateva O.E., Kravchenko M.V., Loktionov O.A. Algorithm development for assessing the risk of damage to the health of workers in the energy industry. Proceedings of the 2019 International Youth Conference on Radio Electronics, Electrical and Power Engineering (REEPE). Moscow: IEEE, 2019. pp. 1–6. DOI: 10.1109/REEPE.2019.8708844
13. Manuele F.A. Incident investigation: our methods are flawed. Professional Safety. 2014. Vol. 59. pp. 34–43.
14. Swuste P., Theunissen J., Schmitz P., Reniers G., Blokland P. Process safety indicators, a review of literature. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. 2016. Vol. 40. pp. 162–173. DOI: 10.1016/j.jlp.2015.12.020
15. Shea T., De Cieri H., Donohue R., Cooper B., Sheehan C. Leading indicators of occupational health and safety: An employee and workplace level validation study. Safety Science. 2016. Vol. 85. pp. 293–304. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2016.01.015