It takes time to get contractors ‘site-ready’, what with checking paperwork and doing site specific safety orientations. And it’s in the interest of both the contractor and the employing company for this process to be completed as it reduces risk on site and is required by law. So who should bear the cost of safety orientations – the contractor (supplier) or the employing company (purchaser)? Currently the position in many contractor orientation scenarios is that the worker is paid for their time although this is not always the case.
The objective of a contractor orientation onto site is to familiarize new workers with their surroundings and to inform them of any rules which should be adhered to. The material may also cover details of the company culture and what is expected of the contractor, including safety and environment related behaviors. In most cases the new contractor is tested on the information to ensure understanding. This is also the point at which documentation and qualifications are verified and contractors are walked around the site being informed of particular hazards.
There are a number of reasons why contractor orientations are of importance to the company, or purchaser of the contracted labor:
1. They are a basic compliance requirement in heavy industry;
2. Improve safety on site as contractors are made aware of hazards;
3. Reduce environmental impact by making contractors aware of associated rules;
4. Improve the contractor’s ability to ‘gel’ with existing processes and people;
5. Give an opportunity to motivate new workers and impart the company culture;
6. Improve efficiency so that contractors can begin work sooner;
7. Highlight any contractors who are not ready to start work due to a lack of understanding;
8. Allow companies to verify insurance details, risk assessments, method statements, qualifications and training records of contractors, before work begins.
Getting back to the initial question, all of the benefits of an orientation listed above, would indicate the huge value they bring to the company and would suggest that the company should pay. However, it is also important to consider the behaviors which the company are aiming to instill in their contractors. For example, when employing a sub-contractor it’s completion of the job which provides the basis of the contract. Most companies would like to see that job being completed by the same group of workers so that the worker is familiar with the site and hazards that surround them.
It is often the case, however, that new workers with the same trade or qualification are sent, depending on availability and other jobs the contractor has going. The result is that there is less familiarity among workers with the site and many more site orientations need to be completed, not only driving up the costs but also reducing productivity. By passing the cost of the orientation onto the contractor, the company may assume that they are more likely to receive the same workers again and again.
If this is the case then the company in question may start to invest more in the ongoing training of their oft-returning contract workforce. Within industries with labor or skills shortages it is the norm to see corporations contributing to the upskilling of existing workers or the training of unskilled workers. And surveys show that the contractors desire more of an input from the companies they’re supplying, when it comes to the training matrices of their workers. In the long term one would expect very well matched industries in terms of the supply and demand of skilled contractors.
Before we digress however, let’s think carefully about the position of the contractor if they’re asked to pay for every worker to take an orientation. On initial introduction of such a concept they may be thinking, “I have to pay for something which I have no option but to do?”
This is a cost which could fast grow, particularly if there is a stream of new workers being sent on site continuously. There is also the question of contractors sending a worker to the same company but in a different location – must they pay twice?
Let’s consider how contractors benefit from site orientations:
1. Risk is reduced so their workers are safer while on site
2. The job can be completed more efficiently
3. They are more likely to win more business with the same company of they have performed well and are a preferred supplier
4. The company is likely to invest more in ongoing training of longer term contractors
5. Improved organization of workers if they’re moving around less
It’s clear that contractor orientations benefit both the company employing the contractor as well as the contractor and the workers themselves. Rather than approaching contractor orientations as a cost to be avoided, heavy industry such as construction, mining, and oil and gas should begin a dialogue which includes the skills requirements of the entire industry with a view to working together to future-proof it.
While there is no exact answer to the question asked, it is a shared opinion across leaders in heavy industry that the safety of the workers involved is the highest priority. When it comes to skills, qualifications, ongoing training and orientations there is a requirement for a fraternal alliance across all stakeholders.
GoContractor is an online contractor management platform which offers both options. Some of our heavy industry clients choose to pass the cost of the orientation onto the contractors but they also use the GoContractor platform to provide further training to their contractors (both free and paid). Other clients choose to absorb the cost of orientation on behalf of their contractors. The platform allows all clients to pre-approve contractor documentation as well as automatically assigning site-specific orientations to the relevant workers. Our clients can even prove the identity of the worker and check their qualifications online, in advance of work starting. Request more information here.
