Interlock Bypass on Line 3
You are the newly appointed site safety lead at a 24/7 food packaging plant. At 02:15 on a Tuesday, line 3's case-packer jams. The shift supervisor, under pressure to meet a 06:00 trailer departure, uses a magnetic bypass on the interlock and asks a 19-year-old agency operator to reach into the discharge chute. The operator's sleeve catches; the line stops; no injury, but a co-worker reports it. The bypass remains in place. Line 3 produces 120 cases/min and accounts for 38% of weekly output. A customer audit is in 9 days. The supervisor has 11 years' service and says 'everyone does it.' Two of the three night-shift leads are agency staff. The plant has no written jam-clearing procedure, and the interlock key is kept in an unlocked drawer.
1. What are your first three actions in the next 60 minutes, and what decision criteria drive the order?
Read the worked answer
Order is driven by imminent danger, evidence preservation, and duty to notify. First, stop line 3 and lock out the case-packer; remove the magnetic bypass and seal it with a tag in a bag. Reason: the bypass defeats the interlock and the hazard is still live; production cannot justify continued exposure. Second, account for the operator and co-workers: separate the operator from the supervisor, offer first aid and EAP, and take a brief factual statement without leading questions. Third, preserve the scene: photograph the chute, bypass, guard, and area; secure CCTV; identify agency workers who saw it. Notify the plant manager and committee chair, and check whether the near miss is notifiable under the site's regulator rules. Do not interview the supervisor in a group or promise confidentiality you cannot keep. Decision criteria: severity potential (amputation), likelihood (recurring jam), control failure (deliberate bypass), vulnerability (young agency worker), and time pressure. The customer audit does not change the order.
2. How should you handle the supervisor's conduct and the agency operator's status? Distinguish immediate safety measures from disciplinary or contractual decisions.
Read the worked answer
Separate immediate safety from discipline. Immediate: keep the supervisor off line 3 and away from safety-critical decisions pending a fact-finding; this is administrative, not punitive. Ensure the agency operator is not disciplined or sent home as a scapegoat; confirm the agency is told the worker is a witness. Investigative: test the 'everyone does it' claim by auditing all interlocks and maintenance logs. If normalised, the fix is systemic: interlock key control, jam-clearing procedure, staffing, and production pressure. Disciplinary: only after evidence; apply just culture. A deliberate bypass is different from an error, but the supervisor's 11 years' service and production pressure are context, not a defence. Contractual: review the agency agreement for safety responsibilities and induction. Document interim reassignment and rationale. Do not let the supervisor investigate their own area.
3. The plant manager asks you to delay the investigation until after the customer audit. What do you say, and what record do you create?
Read the worked answer
I would decline the delay in writing and explain why: the audit is not a reason to leave a live bypass uninvestigated; if the auditor sees the bypass or a stale corrective action, the commercial risk is higher. The investigation can be scoped quickly: secure the bypass, interview the operator and two witnesses, review 30 days of jam logs, and issue an interim instruction. I would tell the plant manager the decision, the reasons, and what can be deferred safely. Record: date/time, request, my response, criteria (imminent hazard, evidence decay, regulatory duty, audit integrity), interim controls, owner, and review date. Copy the committee chair. If the plant manager insists, escalate to the next level and keep the record factual, not personal.