Accepts responsibility for workplace safety shortfalls

David G. Nicholson has been head of the Department of Chemistry since 2005. A recent report by the Norwegian Labour Inspection Authority detailing workplace safety shortfalls in NTNU laboratories makes for unpleasant reading, but Nicholson also says it is a powerful eye-opener. Among the report’s decrees for concrete improvements are conditions he assumes that many have already thought about. Now the department has been given deadlines to meet - and that’s good, he says.

“It's a painful process, but we will come through this and will be stronger,” he said.

As the person in charge of the Department of Chemistry, what do you think about the findings in the Labour Inspection Authority’s report?

“There is no doubt that this is very serious, and there must also be no doubt that we take this seriously."

The Labour Inspection Authority pointed out safety shortfalls that look quite dramatic from outside of the department – but how does this look from the inside?

“I cannot really characterize this in a partial way, and have nothing else to say other than that I fully endorse what the Rector has said in the wake of this case.

- This really should not be anything new. A system audit from 11 years ago revealed that different disciplines under the then-Department of Chemistry had not conducted any surveys and risk assessments. It appears that the work was started in 2005 but not completed. Why has it not been completed?

“I cannot answer this question. But even if the exact work that was begun has not been completed, much has been done to put HSE on the agenda. This is being addressed both at the Rector’s level and at the faculty level. Additionally, there is a responsibility at both the line management and leader level to see that this is followed up and implemented, and I believe we are in the process of doing exactly that.

Risk assessments should be seen as fundamental in a work environment where researchers must handle substances that can sometimes be dangerous or cancer-causing. The inspection authority’s report has revealed that this situation has not been taken seriously. Given the context of the Rosenborg case (in which some employees and students who worked at an old NTNU laboratory were later stricken with cancer), how can this have happened?

“We take the criticism, fully accept it and are not trying to excuse anything. As I have said, we've had HSE work on the agenda, but we have not pushed hard enough. We also conduct risk assessments on an overall level, but have not arranged to have them incorporated in the form that the Labour Inspection Authority requires. We will now make sure that this gets done.

-Who has not done their job?

“I have not done my job. It is implicit in being a leader that you have to take responsibility and not run from it. But I can guess that many people find themselves in glass houses here too.

Is this due to a weak safety culture or to a lack of resources?

“It is a fact that Chemistry Block number 3 is dilapidated and is in great need of renovation. The Department is in the middle of a complicated jigsaw puzzle involving relocation and co-location. We now look forward to having resources allocated to the situation so that the labs can be renovated and be brought up to proper condition. Had the Labour Inspection Authority come one year later, I believe we would have had things more in place. I am not apologizing, but the timing was bad for us. Nevertheless, I take responsibility for the HSE weaknesses that have been revealed at the departmental level. It is not enough to have regulations. They must be followed.

Have you fallen short in your departmental responsibilities?

“I have thought about this in recent days. And yes, I believe I could have done a better job.”

A year and a half ago, a part of the Department of Chemistry was given a very poor assessment by an international evaluation group. This was related to both the workplace environment and research. Now this. What do you think about it?

“I am the type who chooses to see the glass as half full rather than half empty. Both of these reports point out things that were - and that are being addressed. This will help move us forward. I have full respect for the Labour Inspection Authority report. They have done a good job. The department will get through this. It is a painful process, but we will get through it.”

You now have quite a lot to fix in terms of HSE needs. Are you the right person to ensure that this is being done?

“I believe it is incumbent upon the entire chain of responsibility, from the Rector who has responsibility for the building – to the dean of the faculty, department heads and the heads of the various disciplines. We have been given deadlines to correct things, and that's good. Everyone has a responsibility - and I'll take mine.