The Risk Communication Influence - Essay Example

The perception of risk within the petrol station and the risk communication influence the risk perceptions, a case study of Dammam Institution Professor Date Abstract It is unarguable that working in any petrol filing stations presents a number of risks to the workforce. It is also a common knowledge that the perception of workers risk plays a fundamental role in various accidents occurring in the workplace. Besides, the risks effectiveness that is associated with communication and the impact of the perception of risks by the workers must always be taken into consideration when identifying some of the obstacles. Other considerations are on overcoming some of the risks and adopt the best ways to enhance the awareness of risks among those working in the petrol station. The fundamental aim of this project is to determine some of the perception of risks among those working in the petrol station with regards to some of the possible risks within the workplace. The study will also attempt to find out if the stated perceptions have any relationship in the manner in which communication on risk issues are handled. Introduction Brief understanding of petrol station and the risks connected with it According to HSE, (2013) it refers to facilities where people can buy petrol and dispense into their cars. Petrol stations are a beehive of activities and are mainly controlled by workers. Sale of fuel products is the core activity in the petrol stations though there are other activities like wheel balancing among others. There are a myriad of stores that are found within the petrol station selling products such as beverages. There are also other convenience stores with the petrol station areas The human resource personnel working in this petrol station and associated businesses are often exposed to different risks, ranging from how the petrol is stored in the premises and how they are handled. One of the succinct serious risks is that, petrol is highly flammable, explosive and the probability of it catching fire is very high (Real and phantom risks at the petrol station 2007). The chances of petrol evaporating on air are very high. Johnson (2010) and HSE (2011) holds that its explosive and dangerous nature exposes the atmosphere to serious risks given that it can easily ignite at any room temperature. It’s even riskier when exposed to any electrostatic sparks One fundamental issue that should not be assumed is the presence of diesel in the petrol station. Despite the fact that it has low chances of exploding and catching fire, diesel is still considered to be one of the highly combustible elements; furthermore it can easily catch fire at very high temperatures. (ATSDR, (1995) states that there are also a number of chronic illnesses that is associated with a number of people working in the petrol stations given their level of exposure. Some of these illnesses include kidney problems, lung damage among others. Besides the above presented risks, there are also a number of health risks which are associated with working in the petrol stations. Tunsaringkarn et al., (2011) holds that one of the risks of daily exposure to the petroleum products is the chances of being affected by benzene which is one of the core components of petrol and is also a possible carcinogen. The same views are shared by (EPA, 2009) and also by (Capleton & Levy, 2005;). The risk is one of the particular concerns particular to those dispensing petrol fuels to the cars and during the process may inhale the vapours of petrol. (Lynge et al., (1997) believe that it can be very dangerous when they come into dermal contact in instances where there are spills. Cezar-Vaz et al., (2012) and ATSDR, (1995) holds that the petrol station workers face a number of risks such as extreme temperature and noise that might likely interfere with individuals well being. 1.1 The safety and health risks within the risky work areas With the risks that are associated with working at the petrol station, it is necessary that there are safety and health regulations in the petrol stations. The management must ensure that the entire process of regulation is assured and properly implemented. According to HSE, (2013) the regulation process should start from the petrol tanker arrival at the filling station and should be applicable in the fuel unloading process and to the serving the customers. The operators at the petrol station must ensure that training is conducted to the staff members. The training process should entail the process of storing the fuel the moment they arrive at the station, handling and the response during emergency (Institute of Petroleum, 2002). The trainings are very important given that it is one of the important ways of guaranteeing the employee’s protection In a number of occasions, most employees are ignorant with regards to some of their legal fundamental rights. Before signing a contract, the employees should be inquisitive enough to understand some of their rights when at the place of work. Besides, workers should identify some of their core responsibilities and duties to ensure that they are given all the required protective devices (EI/APEA, 2009). If necessary, they should read some of the government regulations and requirements with regards to safety at workplace (Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs, 2014). They must ensure that they are provided with protective gears as required by the government. At the same time, the employers must ensure that they conduct a detailed assessment of the risk to deal with the presented risks that face workers in the petrol stations. The perception of risk amongst the personnel working in the petrol station This paper holds that there are a myriad of factors that influence workers perception on different risks that are present in working within the petrol stations. According to Sjöberg, (2000) the attitudes and beliefs of the workers play an important role in the perception of risks. Peters & Slovic, (1996). the way workers process and deal with information with regards to risk perception is very important. Wildavsky & Dake, (1990) holds that another fundamental issue that should be taken into consideration is the perception of workers towards the risk and how it impacts their lifestyle without taking into consideration what they know about the risk A myriad of research papers shows that accidents recorded in the work places are mainly affected by the behaviour of the workers especially when they are undertaking very risky tasks such as working without PPEs, fuelling cars among others (Sjöberg, 2000). Rundmo, (19960 holds that the behaviour results to what is referred to as the risk denial which is a characteristic that is connected with the perception of risk; The influence of communication of risk amongst the perception of petrol station workers It is unarguable that communication of risks is very important when managing and dealing with risks. Communication is very important given that those communicating some specific risks to customers might deliver messages which are inaccurate which might impact on the manner the risks are perceived by the customers. (Cabinet Office, 2011) The risk communication types play an important role when it comes to the determination on how effective the information should be passed to the workers. For example, the management should prioritize on training on dealing with risks as opposed to providing written materials. According to Creely et al., (2003) training of workers can also result to the generation of a positive attitude on how to deal with the risks. Lundgren and McMakin, (2013) argues that employers should therefore ensure that all the relevant trainings and equipment are provided to the employers to enable them professionally deal with the risks 1.5 The importance of the paper The perception of workers towards risks in the workplace is one of the studies that have not been explored. Most studies have mainly concentrated around risk exposure. Despite the number of studies on the hazardous work environment, only one study done in the petrol station in Brazil has extensively explored and analyzed the perception of workers towards hazardous work environment. The statistics proves the scarcity of information in the area. Byon, (1999) and Jakobsson et al., (1993) believes that the limited information in the area is as a result of the introduction of different petrol stations which are self service in some parts of the world. It is not common in all countries across the globe. They hold that there are a number of countries across the globe where attendants still pump petrol to the customers. An example is in Saudi Arabia where workers still dispense petrol to the customers. Customers are only allowed to fuel cars themselves when they visit self service stations which are very few (Jakobsson et al., 1993 and Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs, 2014). The current statistics from Council of Saudi Chambers, (2013 shows that there roughly 9000 petrol stations in Saudi Arabia which covers 170,000km of the roads in the country. More than 90% of the petrol stations in Saudi Arabia are individually owned (Asharqia Chamber, 2012). Besides, Saudi Arabia is generally a hot and dry country , (Pandya et al., 1975). These conditions make it riskier to work in the petrol stations due to the high chances of the exposure of fire and benzene from petrol (Almazroui et al., 2012 and HSE, 2011a; Johnson, 2010; HSE, 2004; CCOHS, n.d.).). AIMS AND OBJECTIVES 1. 2. Aims As stated above the main aim of the study is to critically analyze and determine the perception of risk amongst those working in the petrol station towards the risks which are potential in the places of wok. The study will also find out if some of these presented perceptions have any relationship with some of the risks communication. Objectives To analyze how petrol station workers perceive risk in different work places To analyze and determine of the attitudes, demographics and the workers behaviour have any of the perception of risks To assess the risk awareness level among worker To conduct a detailed examination on whether there is a connection between the perception of workers and the available risk communication To critically analyze the effectiveness of the current risk communication HYPOTHESES The key null and alternative hypothesis in the study is as below H0 – The perception of risk among workers in the petrol station has no positive relationship with the workers demographics and is not by any extent influenced by the communication on risks received in Damman ciy. H1 - The perception of risk among workers has positive relationship with the workers demographics and is not by any extent influenced by the risk communication received in Damman, Saudi Arabia METHODOLOGY The design of the structured interviews To effectively collect the data on the attitudes, behaviours and background of the workers in the petrol station, the paper adopted the use of the survey. The survey will mainly be conducted around different petrol stations in Dammam city which is found on the Eastern part of Saudi Arabia. The city has 160 total number of petrol stations , making it the best place for the interviews given the high number of petrol station workers in the area (Wilson, 2014; Bryman and Bell, 2011, SABQ Online Newspaper, 2011). The interviews will adopt one on one technique to conduct the structured interviews. The interviewers will be provided with the questions and answers which are standardized. The questions will mainly cover the workers opinion, demographics, and attitudes. A close ended questionnaire will be used to serve the purpose. (Bryman, 2012 and United States General Accounting Office, 1991) holds that there are a number of benefits which are associated with one on one benefit over other methods. The first advantage is that the interviewer has an opportunity to offer guidance and support to the residence when they experience any difficulty besides having an opportunity to ask very unique questions in the interview setting. The second advantage is that it makes it easy for the researcher to establish the required connections with the participants who can easily pursued them to get the answers some specific questions. The engagement and persuasion might not be easy when other approaches are adopted. Before they are distributed, the researcher will conduct a pilot study to test the questionnaire to ensure that its design and content works and serves the purpose of the research objectives. The test gives the researcher an opportunity to refine parts which are not clear. The study will consider 10 participants in the pilot study and a feedback will be provided before the distribution of the questionnaire to the workers. (Cohen et al., 2013; Collins, 2003) The survey implementation The respondents will be subjected to the timetables mentioned in the proposal. The study will consider interviewing a minimum of 100 of workers as calculated from (Rasoft) which is an online calculator. Analysis of data The study will adopt SPSS to analyze the descriptive statistics of various demographic characteristics. The analysis will include the data obtained from the workers who were interviewed, the number of workers who participated, ages, ethnicities of the workers, level of education and the marital status. ((Chan and Walmsley, 1997 and Adams and Anthony, 1996). The paper assumes that the collected data is not distributed normally given that the nominal and ordinal scales were applied as this is a behavioral study. Therefore, the paper will adopt non-parametric tests in the analysis of the data collected The study will also use Chi-Square tests to determine the relationship between risk perception of workers and their ages, ethnicities, marital status, and levels of education. There are other tests like Kruskal –Wallis test will also be applied in the evaluation of influential strengths of some of the presented variables, which measures the perception of risk by workers and are organized on more levels It will also use the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test in assessing the level of communication of risk with regards to whether workers training have a significant connection on the perception of risks by the workers (Bergmann et al., 2000). References 1. Adams, D.C. & Anthony, C.D., 1996. Using randomization techniques to analyse behavioural data. Animal Behaviour, 51(4), pp.733–738. 2. Almazroui, M. et al., 2012. Recent climate change in the Arabian Peninsula: annual rainfall and temperature analysis of Saudi Arabia for 1978–2009. International Journal of Climatology, 32(6), pp.953–966. 3. Asharqia Chamber, 2012. 90% of gas stations in Saudi Arabia are «individual investments». Available at: http://www.chamber.org.sa/English/MediaCenter/BusinessNews/Pages/90ofgasstationsinSaudiArabiaare%C2%ABindividualinvestments%C2%BB.aspx [Accessed February 9, 2014]. 4. ATSDR, 1995a. Public Health Statement: Fuel Oils / Kerosene. Available at: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/phs/phs.asp?id=514&tid=91 [Accessed February 10, 2014]. 5. ATSDR, 1995b. Public Health Statement for Automotive Gasoline. Available at: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/phs/phs.asp?id=466&tid=83 [Accessed February 9, 2014]. 6. Bergmann, R., Ludbrook, J. & Spooren, W.P.J.M., 2000. Different Outcomes of the Wilcoxon—Mann—Whitney Test from Different Statistics Packages. The American Statistician, 54(1), pp.72–77. 7. Bryman, A. & Bell, E., 2011. Business Research Methods 3e, Oxford University Press. 8. Bukvic, N. et al., 1998. Sister chromatid exchange (SCE) and micronucleus (MN) frequencies in lymphocytes of gasoline station attendants. Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis, 415(1–2), pp.25–33. 9. Byon, O.-S., 1999. Self-service gasoline pump system with game function. 10. Cabinet Office, 2011. Communicating risk guidance. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/communicating-risk-guidance [Accessed February 12, 2014]. 11. Capleton, A.C. & Levy, L.S., 2005. An overview of occupational benzene exposures and occupational exposure limits in Europe and North America. Chemico-Biological Interactions, 153–154, pp.43–53. 12. CCOHS, n.d. Gasoline. Available at: http://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/chemicals/chem_profiles/gasoline.html [Accessed February 10, 2014]. 13. Cezar-Vaz, M.R. et al., 2012. Risk Perception and Occupational Accidents: A Study of Gas Station Workers in Southern Brazil. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 9(7), pp.2362–2377. 14. Chan, Y. & Walmsley, R.P., 1997. Learning and Understanding the Kruskal-Wallis One-Way Analysis-of-Variance-by-Ranks Test for Differences Among Three or More Independent Groups. Physical Therapy, 77(12), pp.1755–1761. 15. Collins, D., 2003. Pretesting survey instruments: An overview of cognitive methods. Quality of Life Research, 12(3), pp.229–238. 16. Council of Saudi Chambers, 2013. Council’s Gas Stations Committee Launches Awareness Campaign. Available at: http://www.csc.org.sa/English/News/Pages/2013050101.aspx [Accessed February 8, 2014]. 17. Creely, K.S. et al., 2003. Effective communication of chemical hazard and risk information using a multimedia safety data sheet. Health & Safety Executive, Norwich, UK: Crown. 18. EI/APEA, 2009. Petrol filling stations guidance on managing the risks of fire and explosion (The Red Guide). Available at: http://www.energyinst.org/filegrab/?ref=1317&f=the-red-guide.pdf [Accessed February 9, 2014]. 19. EPA, 2009a. Benzene TEACH Chemical Summary. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/teach/chem_summ/BENZ_summary.pdf [Accessed February 10, 2014]. 20. EPA, 2009b. Risk Management Program Guidance for Propane Storage Facilities (40 CFR Part 68). Available at: http://www.epa.gov/oem/docs/chem/storage.pdf [Accessed February 13, 2014]. 21. Gerrard, M., Gibbons, F.X. & Reis-Bergan, M., 1999. The Effect of Risk Communication on Risk Perceptions: the Significance of Individual Differences. JNCI Monographs, 1999(25), pp.94–100. 22. HSE, 2011a. Buncefield: Why did it happen? Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/comah/buncefield/buncefield-report.pdf [Accessed February 10, 2014]. 23. HSE, 2011b. Dispensing petrol as a fuel: Health and safety guidance for employees. Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg216.htm#a4 [Accessed February 4, 2014]. 24. HSE, 2013a. Petroleum - Fire and explosion. Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/fireandexplosion/petroleum.htm#consolidation [Accessed February 5, 2014]. 25. HSE, 2013b. Petroleum - frequently asked questions - Fire and explosion. Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/fireandexplosion/petroleum-faqs.htm [Accessed February 9, 2014]. 26. HSE, 2013c. Consultation on proposals for the consolidation of petroleum legislation. Available at: http://consultations.hse.gov.uk/gf2.ti/f/19362/515077.1/PDF/-/cd264.pdf [Accessed February 9, 2014]. 27. Institute of Petroleum, 2002. Environmental Guidelines for Petrol Filling Stations. Available at: http://www.energyinst.org.uk/content/files/file366.pdf [Accessed February 8, 2014]. 28. Jakobsson, R. et al., 1993. Acute Myeloid Leukemia among Petrol Station Attendants. Archives of Environmental Health: An International Journal, 48(4), pp.255–259. 29. Johnson, D.M., 2010. The potential for vapour cloud explosions – Lessons from the Buncefield accident. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 23(6), pp.921–927. 30. Lagorio, S. et al., 1994. Mortality of filling station attendants. Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health, 20(5), pp.331–338. 31. Lundgren, R.E. & McMakin, A.H., 2013. Risk communication: A handbook for communicating environmental, safety, and health risks, John Wiley & Sons. 32. Lynge, E. et al., 1997. Risk of Cancer and Exposure to Gasoline Vapors. American Journal of Epidemiology, 145(5), pp.449–458. 33. Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs, 2014. Gas Stations and Service Centers Rules List in Saudi Arabia. Available at: http://www.momra.gov.sa/gas/files/download.ashx?file=EQS-Rules.pdf [Accessed February 7, 2014]. 34. OSHA, n.d. Gasoline Service Stations. Available at: https://www.osha.gov/pls/imis/sic_manual.display?id=29&tab=description [Accessed February 9, 2014]. 35. Pandya, K.P. et al., 1975. Occupational Exposure of Petrol Pump Workers. Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 18(4), pp.363–364. 36. Peters, E. & Slovic, P., 1996. The Role of Affect and Worldviews as Orienting Dispositions in the Perception and Acceptance of Nuclear Power1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26(16), pp.1427–1453. 37. Real and phantom risks at the petrol station: The curious case of mobile phones, fires and body static. (2007). Routledge. 38. Rekhadevi, P.V. et al., 2010. Genotoxicity in Filling Station Attendants Exposed to Petroleum Hydrocarbons. Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 54(8), pp.944–954. 39. Rundmo, T., 1996. Associations between risk perception and safety. Safety Science, 24(3), pp.197–209. 40. SABQ Online Newspaper, 2011. Eastern Province Amana Targets to Improve 700 Petrol Stations. Available at: http://sabq.org/NITede [Accessed February 23, 2014]. 41. Sandman, P.M., 1989. Hazard versus Outrage in the Public Perception of Risk. In V. T. Covello, D. B. McCallum, & M. T. Pavlova, eds. Effective Risk Communication. Contemporary Issues in Risk Analysis. Springer US, pp. 45–49. Available at: http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4613-1569-8_6 [Accessed February 4, 2014]. 42. Sirdah, M.M., Al Laham, N.A. & El Madhoun, R.A., 2013. Possible health effects of liquefied petroleum gas on workers at filling and distribution stations of Gaza governorates. Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, 19(3). 43. Sjöberg, L., 2000. Factors in Risk Perception. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 20(1), pp.1–12. 44. Tunsaringkarn, T. et al., 2011. Chromosomal Damage Risk Assessment to Benzene Exposure among Gasoline Station Workers in Bangkok Metropolitan, Thailand. Journal of Environment and Earth Science, 1(2), pp.37–44. 45. United States General Accounting Office, 1991. Using Structured Interviewing Techniques. Available at: http://www.gao.gov/special.pubs/pe1015.pdf#page=4&zoom=auto [Accessed February 16, 2014]. 46. Uzma, N. et al., 2008. Impact of Organic Solvents and Environmental Pollutants on the Physiological Function in Petrol Filling Workers. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 5(3), pp.139–146. 47. WHO, 2002. The World Health Report 2002: Reducing Risks, Promoting Healthy Life, World Health Organisation. 48. Wildavsky, A. & Dake, K., 1990. Theories of Risk Perception: Who Fears What and Why? Daedalus, 119(4), pp.41–60. 49. Wilson, C., 2014. Chapter 1 - Structured Interviews. In C. Wilson, ed. Interview Techniques for Ux Practitioners. Boston: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 1–21. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780124103931000016 [Accessed February 15, 2014]. Read More