譯文（字?jǐn)?shù) 11502）：

施工現(xiàn)場的安全角色

T. Michael Toole, P.E., M.ASCE

摘  要

一份對設(shè)計工程師、總承包商和分包商的調(diào)查表明現(xiàn)場安全責(zé)任到底由誰承擔(dān)沒有統(tǒng)一的意見。并對現(xiàn)場安全作用進(jìn)行了討論，關(guān)于可能的解釋缺乏一致的意見。有人建議，具體的現(xiàn)場安全責(zé)任將在未來的項(xiàng)目根據(jù)各組的分配控制能力需要分配，以防止引起建筑事故八根源因素。

CE數(shù)據(jù)庫關(guān)鍵詞：建筑業(yè);職業(yè)安全;施工現(xiàn)場事故

介紹

雖然職業(yè)安全與健康法案通過30幾年，但參與工地安全建設(shè)項(xiàng)目的作用遠(yuǎn)未塵埃落定。這尤其迎合建筑師和工程師。一個施工現(xiàn)場安全的突出文本，Levitt 和 Samelson 甚至都沒有提及角色。然而，在最近幾年，業(yè)內(nèi)專業(yè)人士一直在關(guān)注幾個高知名度的訴訟和職業(yè)安全健康管理局OSHA ，裁決中A / ES事故責(zé)任由工作在現(xiàn)場的建筑工人承擔(dān)。最近試圖修改土木工程師的美國社會施工現(xiàn)場安全ASCE 政策聲明表示沒有對現(xiàn)場安全職責(zé)范圍內(nèi)作ASCE協(xié)議。

本文的目的是幫助澄清在現(xiàn)場安全設(shè)計和施工的專業(yè)人士的角色。本文首先呈現(xiàn)了現(xiàn)場安全的一份調(diào)查，表明A /Es、總承包商GC和分包商對現(xiàn)場安全到底誰負(fù)責(zé)沒有統(tǒng)一的意見。然后，對為什么關(guān)于現(xiàn)場安全責(zé)任沒有統(tǒng)一的意見建立學(xué)說，并提出建筑事故的因果模型。最后，基于實(shí)體防止建筑事故能力有限對現(xiàn)場安全責(zé)任也有限，這種分析可以在現(xiàn)場安全角色上建立一種公平實(shí)際的假想。

劉易斯堡，助理教授，土木與環(huán)境工程系，巴克內(nèi)爾大學(xué)，PA 17837

外文原文（字符數(shù) 42775）：

Construction Site Safety Roles

T. Michael Toole, P.E., M.ASCE1

Abstract:A survey of design engineers, general contractors, and subcontractors indicates there is not uniform agreement on the site safety responsibilities that should be assumed by each of these groups. Possible explanations for this lack of shared expectations regarding site safety roles are discussed. It is suggested that specific site safety responsibilities be assigned on future projects based on each group’s ability to control the factors needed to prevent eight root causes of construction accidents.

DOI: 10.1061/~ASCE!0733-9364~2002!128:3~203!

CE Database keywords: Construction industry; Occupational safety; Construction site accidents.

Introduction

Although the Occupational Safety and Health Act was passed 30 years ago, the respective roles of the various parties involved in construction projects for site safety are far from settled. This is particularly true for architects and engineers ~A/Es!, i.e., design professionals. One of the salient texts on construction site safety ~Levitt and Samelson 1987! does not even mention the role of the A/Es. Yet in recent years, industry professionals have been following several high-profile lawsuits and Occupational Safety and Health Administration ~OSHA! rulings in which A/Es have been held responsible for accidents suffered on the job site by construction workers ~Lunch 1995, 1997; Smith 1998; ‘‘Court’’ 1999; Korman et al. 1999; Loulakis and Santiago 2000!. Recent attempts to modify the American Society of Civil Engineers ~ASCE! Policy Statement 350 on construction site safety indicate there is not agreement within ASCE on the members’ site safety responsibilities ~Toole and Gambatese 2002!.

The objective of this paper is to help clarify the roles of design and construction professionals in site safety. The paper first presents the results of a survey on site safety expectations that indicate that A/Es, general contractors ~GCs!, and subcontractors are not uniformly agreed on which group should have primary responsibility for site safety. Next, reasons why there are not common expectations about site safety responsibilities are theorized. A causal model about construction accidents is then proposed, and factors associated with each cause are identified. Finally, the respective abilities of the entities typically involved with construction projects to influence these factors are analyzed. This analysis can be used to establish fair and practical expectations on site safety roles based on the assumption that entities that have limited abilities to prevent construction accidents should also have limited responsibility for site safety.