ForewordPotential serious injuries and fatalities (PSIF)Total recordable injury frequency rate (TRIFR)Lost time injury (LTI) analysisFatality analysisProcess safety management (PSM) analysisSickness absenceDownload publication

For terminology definitions and calculations, please refer to the worldsteel publication Safety and health principles and definitions available at worldsteel.org

Foreword

Welcome to the World Steel Association’s 2024 Safety and health in the steel industry data report. This report is based on data provided by our members and offers crucial insights into our industry’s ongoing commitment to safety and the well-being of our workforce.

In 2023, worldsteel’s members reported 61 fatalities globally, representing a global fatal frequency rate (FFR) of 0.017, the lowest on record. Additionally, our lost time injury frequency rate (LTIFR) has risen slightly to 0.76 from 0.65 last year, but it remains below historical levels.

While we must approach lagging metrics cautiously, acknowledging their retrospective nature, it’s evident that our industry’s safety trajectory is generally positive. Despite challenges, we’re making strides in implementing next-generation safety approaches such as human and organisational performance (HOP) and maintaining a focus on process safety management (PSM).

It’s crucial to recognise the importance of looking at safety holistically, considering not only traditional safety metrics but also broader issues such as health in all its facets. To move performance to the next level we need to adopt a comprehensive view, integrating physical health, mental well-being, and overall quality of life into our safety frameworks.

To this end, moving forward, it is important that we promote a culture of holistic well-being for every individual in the global steel industry. Together, let us continue to strive for excellence in safety and health, ensuring a safer and healthier future for all.

Andrew Purvis
Director, Sustainable Manufacturing

To move performance to the next level, we need to adopt a comprehensive view, integrating physical health, mental wellbeing, and overall quality of life into our safety frameworks.

worldsteel’s position on lagging indicators

The most popular lagging indicators, such as lost time injury frequency rate (LTIFR) or total recordable injury frequency rate (TRIFR), will be kept within the worldsteel reporting framework and as a reference of the industry’s general performance.

However, comparisons between organisations or local sites should not be made using LTIFR or TRIFR.

Below are the main reasons:

  • These indicators correlate poorly with the severity of accidents and injuries and do not provide a valid or reliable measure of safety and health controls and initiatives.
  • A smaller organisation’s LTIFR or TRIFR is more significantly affected by a single incident but this doesn’t necessarily indicate a more dangerous working environment.
  • Although worldsteel has a definition for lost time injury (LTI) and total recordable injury (TRI), companies vary in their definition of what constitutes an LTI and TRI.

These two indicators should not be part of individual, team or organisation objectives, bonuses, or incentives as they can foster a negative attitude towards reporting, limiting the organisational ability to learn and improve.

Potential serious injuries and fatalities (PSIF)

A serious injury is a permanent impairment or life-altering state, or an injury that, if not immediately addressed, will lead to death or permanent or long-term impairment.

A potential serious injury or fatality is a near miss incident that could have resulted in a serious injury or fatality (PSIF) if not for specific barriers or countermeasures or if one factor around the event had been changed.

A precursor of PSIF is a high-risk situation in which control methods are absent, ineffective, or not complied with, and if allowed to continue, would potentially result in a fatality or serious injury.

The number of individual sites reporting to worldsteel using of the PSIF framework has increased in recent years. The figures below only represent the sites reporting PSIFs and combining contractors and employees.

In 2023, 95% of sites made use of a PSIF framework.

Figure 1: Potential serious injuries and fatalities triangle 2023 for employees and contractors

* In 2023, there were 61 fatalities reported to worldsteel. In order to preserve the ratios within the PSIF section of this report, fatalities reported by organisations that were not able to provide PSIF information have been excluded from this analysis.

** All other injuries includes Restricted Work Cases (RWC), Medically Treated Injuries (MTI) and Minor Injuries (MI). Stated injury statistics in this graphic are derived from companies that report PSIF information to worldsteel.

Typically around 20% of incidents have the potential to become serious injuries or fatalities.

To reduce serious harm, steelmakers should focus on better identifying, managing and reporting near misses and injuries with the potential to cause fatalities and serious injuries.

Total recordable injury frequency rate (TRIFR)

Total recordable incidents comprise fatalities, lost time injuries (LTIs), Restricted work cases (RWCs) and medically treated injuries (MTIs). In the data survey, restricted work cases and MTIs are reported separately. Working hours are counted only on sites that have reported at least one RWC or MTI.

Combined Contractors Employees
2017 4.5 4.0 4.8
2018 4.9 2.9 6.3
2019 4.8 2.9 6.2
2020 3.6 2.4 4.3
2021 4.02 2.69 4.93
2022 3.75 2.55 4.82
2023 4.73 2.83 6.46

Total recordable injury frequency rate increased from 3.75 in 2022 to 4.73 in 2023.

Attribute Value
1. Fatalities 55
2. Lost time injuries 2431
3. Restricted work cases 1365
4. Medical treatment injuries 5364
5. Minor injuries 15679
6. Near misses (incidents) 150542
7. Unsafe acts and situations 3362010

* In 2023, there were 61 fatalities reported to worldsteel. In order to preserve the ratios within the TRIFR section of this report, fatalities reported by organisations that were not able to provide TRIFR information have been excluded from this analysis.

Safety pyramids can be used to compare the shape of a company’s incident triangle. In case the company triangle is narrower, it could mean that not all incidents are reported, or that fatality prevention requires more attention. It should be noted that the average incident triangle is not necessarily optimal; it should probably be wider. Reducing the number of more minor incidents does not directly reduce the probability of severe incidents, but having those reported allows action to be taken to mitigate risks that might otherwise cause severe incidents.

Figure 4: Safety pyramids 2023 for employees and contractors

Attribute Value
1. Fatalities 15
2. Lost time injuries 1624
3. Restricted work cases 869
4. Medical treatment injuries 3978
5. Minor injuries 12277
6. Near misses 115102
7. Unsafe acts and situations 2796539
Attribute Value
1. Fatalities 40
2. Lost time injuries 807
3. Restricted work case 496
4. Medical treatment injuries 1386
5. Minor injuries 3402
6. Near misses 35440
7. Unsafe acts and situations 565471

More must be done to improve contractor management systems, to improve reporting and to better manage and reduce the risks contractors face. This is especially true of PSIF events

Table 1: Ratio lost time injuries (LTIs) vs fatalities 2004-2023

Cause LTIs Fatalities Ratio LTIs per 1 fatality
Gassing and asphyxiation 236 138 1.71
Explosion 218 93 2.34
Rail 223 73 3.05
Fire 317 75 4.23
Electrical 435 80 5.44
Structural failure 342 57 6.00
Fall from height 1977 318 6.22
On site road vehicle 890 129 6.90
Forklift 316 34 9.29
Overhead crane 897 103 8.71
Moving machinery 3130 301 10.40
Hot metal 714 66 10.82
Falling object 2057 170 12.10
Other mobile equipment 818 54 15.15
Off site road vehicle 321 13 24.69
Hot substances 502 20 25.10
Product loading 665 17 39.12
Product handling storage 1947 38 51.24
Exposure to chemicals 170 3 56.67
Manual tasks tools 2623 8 327.88
Slip, trip and fall 3394 6 565.67

The ratio between lost time injuries (LTIs) and fatalities provides important insight into workplace safety. A small ratio suggests fewer LTIs per fatality, and while less common these type of incidents represent a higher risk of fatalities.

Many process safety issues fall into this category. It is therefore particularly important to conduct thorough incident investigations and implement preventive measures for incidents with low ratios.

The table shows the ratio between lost time injuries and fatalities by causes. Small ratios mean that per fatality, there are, on average, only a small amount of lost time injuries; a big ratio indicates there are many lost time injuries per fatality. If these were drawn as an incident triangle for each cause, the triangles for the small ratios would be very narrow.

These ratios show that to prevent fatalities, it is more important to undertake comprehensive and robust incident investigations and instigate preventive measures for those incidents with a low ratio. It is precisely these incidents that are most likely to lead to fatalities without effective prevention. These ratios also emphasise the usefulness of categorising potential serious injuries and fatalities among other incidents.

Lost time injury (LTI) analysis

Lost time injury (LTI). Any work-related injury resulting in the employee or contractor being unable to return to work for their next scheduled work period. Returning to work with work restrictions does not constitute a LTI status, no matter how minimal or severe the restrictions, provided it is at the employee’s next scheduled shift. However, if an injury deteriorates and time is later lost, a LTI should be recorded. Lost time injury frequency rate (LTIFR) is calculated by combining fatalities and LTIs.

Contractors Employees Total
2014 1330 3710 5040
2015 1151 3366 4517
2016 925 3129 4054
2017 743 2835 3578
2018 923 2429 3352
2019 1002 2211 3213
2020 846 2021 2867
2021 870 2075 2945
2022 843 1634 2477
2023 847 1639 2486
Employees Contractors Combined
2014 1.76 0.88 1.39
2015 1.48 0.72 1.17
2016 1.21 0.64 1.01
2017 1.25 0.52 0.97
2018 1.03 0.56 0.84
2019 0.94 0.65 0.83
2020 0.98 0.66 0.85
2021 1.05 0.59 0.85
2022 0.85 0.45 0.65
2023 1.04 0.50 0.76

Lost time injury frequency rate increased from 0.65 in 2022 to 0.76 in 2023.

Figure 7: Causes of lost time injuries 2014-2023 for employees and contractors combined

Attribute Value
Manual tasks tools 489
Slip, trip and fall 451
Moving machinery 120
Falling object 118
Fall from height 99
Product handling storage 98
Unknown 86
Hot substances 85
Overhead crane 65
On site road vehicle 62
Hot Metal 33
Object in the eye 28
Electrical 26
Other mobile equipment 23
Forklift 22
Fire 21
Exposure to chemicals 20
Gassing and asphyxiation 16
Product loading 11
Off site road vehicle 10
Structural failure 10
Explosion 9
Rail 8
Attribute Value
Slip, trip and fall 1770
Manual tasks tools 1456
Moving machinery 848
Fall from height 599
Falling object 476
Product handling storage 395
Overhead crane 243
Hot substances 239
On site road vehicle 224
Unknown 204
Hot metal 156
Other mobile equipment 123
Object in the eye 119
Electrical 115
Off site road vehicle 98
Exposure to chemicals 95
Forklift 81
Fire 76
Product loading 73
Gassing and asphyxiation 60
Rail 55
Explosion 50
Structural failure 38
Attribute Value
Slip, trip and fall 3394
Manual tasks tools 2623
Moving machinery 2235
Fall from height 1462
Falling object 1436
Product handling storage 1150
Unknown 715
Overhead crane 679
On site road vehicle 613
Hot substances 502
Other mobile equipment 499
Hot metal 472
Product loading 398
Object in the eye 317
Electrical 302
Forklift 232
Fire 220
Off site road vehicle 217
Gassing and asphyxiation 175
Structural failure 171
Exposure to Chemicals 170
Rail 152
Explosion 128

The following graphs show the distribution of causes separated by employees and contractors.

Figure 8: Causes of lost time injuries in 2022 for employees and contractors

 

Attribute Value
Manual tasks tools 170
Slip, trip and fall 126
Falling object 68
Unknown 63
Moving machinery 44
Fall from height 42
Hot substances 38
On site road vehicle 28
Product handling storage 25
Other mobile equipment 15
Overhead crane 15
Forklift 12
Gassing and asphyxiation 11
Electrical 10
Off site road vehicle 9
Fire 8
Hot metal 7
Exposure to chemicals 5
Explosion 4
Object in the eye 4
Rail 3
Structural failure 3
Product loading 2
Attribute Value
Slip, trip and fall 325
Manual tasks tools 319
Moving machinery 76
Product handling storage 73
Fall from height 57
Falling object 50
Overhead crane 50
Hot substances 47
On site road vehicle 34
Hot metal 26
Object in the eye 24
Unknown 23
Electrical 16
Exposure to chemicals 15
Fire 13
Forklift 10
Product loading 9
Other mobile equipment 8
Structural failure 7
Explosion 5
Gassing and asphyxiation 5
Rail 5
Off site road vehicle 1

The top five causes of lost time injury in 2023 for employees and contractors combined were: use of manual tools, slipping, moving machinery, falling objects and falling from height.

Fatality analysis

Death from a work-related injury, certified by a medical professional. Fatality frequency rate (FFR) is calculated on the number of fatalities per million hours worked.

China (indirect data) Contractors Employees
2014 20 66 44
2015 32 69 53
2016 27 57 45
2017 15 49 40
2018 22 48 70
2019 18 49 32
2020 12 50 34
2021 11 55 45
2022 7 53 25
2023 6 40 15

* Data received from China via Sinosteel Wuhan Safety & Environmental Protection Research Institute (SEPRI) does not distinguish between employees and contractors. Data received directly from Chinese worldsteel members does and is included in the analysis.

The total number of fatalities reported to worldsteel during 2023 was 61, which represents a decrease of 28% compared to 85 in 2022.

Employees Contractors Combined
2014 0.021 0.044 0.030
2015 0.023 0.043 0.032
2016 0.017 0.040 0.025
2017 0.018 0.034 0.024
2018 0.030 0.029 0.029
2019 0.014 0.032 0.021
2020 0.016 0.039 0.025
2021 0.023 0.037 0.029
2022 0.013 0.028 0.020
2023 0.010 0.023 0.017

The fatality frequency rate decreased from 0.020 in 2022 to 0.017 in 2023.

Figure 11: Causes of fatalities 2013-2022

Attribute Value
Fall from height 12
Moving machinery 9
Falling object 6
Electrical 5
Overhead crane 4
On site road vehicle 3
Hot substances 3
Hot metal 3
Structural failure 2
Other mobile equipment 2
Gassing and asphyxiation 2
Manual tasks tools 1
Forklift 1
Fire 1
Explosion 1
Attribute Value
Fall from height 72
Moving machinery 65
Gassing and asphyxiation 37
On site road vehicle 29
Overhead crane 26
Falling object 24
Structural failure 20
Electrical 18
Explosion 15
Other mobile equipment 12
Hot metal 10
Hot substances 9
Fire 9
Forklift 8
Product handling storage 6
Rail 6
Off site road vehicle 3
Exposure to chemicals 3
Slips, trips and falls 2
Manual tasks tools 2
Product loading 1
Attribute Value
Fall from height 167
Moving machinery 139
On site road vehicle 75
Gassing and asphyxiation 73
Falling object 70
Overhead crane 47
Hot metal 35
Electrical 33
Structural failure 31
Fire 30
Explosion 28
Rail 26
Other mobile equipment 23
Hot substances 20
Forklift 16
Product handling storage 13
Product loading 8
Manual tasks tools 8
Slips, trips and falls 6
Off site road vehicle 6
Exposure to chemicals 3
Unknown 1

The top 5 causes of fatalities over the past decade were falling from height, moving machinery, on site road vehicles, gassing and asphyxiation and falling objects. These are consistent over time.

The following graphs show the distribution of causes split by employees and contractors.

Attribute Value
Overhead crane 2
Moving machinery 2
Falling object 2
Gassing and asphyxiation 2
Fall from height 2
Structural failure 1
Other mobile equipment 1
Manual tasks tools 1
Hot metal 1
Electrical 1
Attribute Value
Fall from height 10
Moving machinery 7
Electrical 4
Falling objects 4
Hot substances 3
On site road vehicle 3
Hot metal 2
Overhead crane 2
Explosion 1
Fire 1
Forklift 1
Other moblie equipment 1
Structural failure 1

Contractors remain a vulnerable community within the global steel industry. Causes of fatalities for contractors and employees are different, reflecting the different activities and risks faced by each group.

Process safety management (PSM) analysis

Process safety management (PSM) is a blend of operational, engineering and management skills focused on preventing catastrophic accidents and near misses, particularly explosions, fires, structural collapse, and damaging releases associated with a loss of containment of energy or dangerous substances such as molten metals, fuels, and chemicals.

The manufacturing of steel involves processes with intrinsic hazards that need careful management. The measures required to control these hazards are often complex. The focus of process safety management is not limited to protecting the people within the company but also includes the environment, assets, and the surrounding community.

Table 2: Significant events benchmark

Typical process safety events Quantity Main causes
Fires 294 Inadequate planned inspections | Falling of spatter | Poor housekeeping | Welding spatters | Combustible dusts (Ti) | Oil spills | Burns of grease and scale | Non-compliance with procedure | Protections and barriers out of standard, inadequate material | Inadequate engineering system | Preventive/predictive maintenance not correctly specified | Electrical | Molten metal leakage | Maintenance failure | Coke oven gas leakage because of corrosion.
Explosions 26 Gas explosion due to high temperature during the waste process | Explosive mixture formation | Oxygen pipe | Protections and barriers are out of standard, inadequate material | Inadequate engineering system | Preventive/predictive maintenance not correctly specified | Non-compliance with procedure | Contact of steel and water | Explosive materials | Explosion of the open circuit corrosion inhibitor tank as a result of the chemical reaction caused by adding hypochlorite to the open circuit corrosion inhibitor’s main tank.
Molten metal and water reactions 34 Damp casting powder causing slag entrainment and breakout|Probable water ingress in the slag pit| Minor explosions in the slag chamber due to heavy rain and minor explosion in tapping pit due to high groundwater level | Inadequate engineering system | Preventive/predictive maintenance not correctly specified | Work order incomplete | Non-intentional error | Inadequate material | Cooling water leakage | BPCS control loop failure | Water contaminated scrap.
Gas and liquid releases (flammable, toxic or asphyxiant gases) 825 Barrier activations/failures | Gas leakage through pipeline flanges | Inadequate engineering system | Preventive/predictive maintenance not correctly specified | Non-compliance with procedure | Inadequate material | Inadequate engineering system | Work order incomplete, task not designed correctly | Corrosion in gas pipelines | Lockout/tagout failure | Flow reversion |Critical equipment failure | Personnel error: chemical reaction that occurs when two different chemicals are mixed | Dimensional incompatibility Issues |Chemical spillage during process | NaOH leakge due to vavle failure |Inadequate supervision | Protections and barriers out of standard.

 

Figure 13: Process safety management maturity assessment results 2023

The Process Safety Management maturity analysis was derived from data provided by 20 organisations, representing 22% of worldsteel members.

Increasing maturity in process safety management can be observed. The industry has grown in experience and expertise in process safety management; however, there is an important area of improvement for element 15 (measurement and metrics). Process Safety KPIs are different from Occupational Safety KPIs. This issue has led to requests from worldsteel members to provide effective indicators for benchmarking and monitoring purposes. In the past, worldsteel has referenced well-accepted frameworks (e.g., RP API 754); however, a specific set of indicators and guidance are being developed.

worldsteel’s approach to process safety management is built on the American Petroleum Institute Recommended Practice 754, and identifies 17 key PSM elements.

Sickness absence

Sickness absence [Percentage] is calculated as the total number of hours of sickness absence per total work hours. This indicator is only calculated for employees.

The following table shows the sickness absence per region.

Table 3: Sickness absence per region 2015 – 2023

% Sickness Absence 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Africa and Middle East (AME) 0.13 0.25 0.23 0.29 1.06 0.18 1.01 2.51 3.95
Asia/Pacific 0.12 0.08 0.08 0.19 0.15 0.05 0.11 0.54 0.69
Russia & other CIS + Ukraine 0.75 1.26 1.41 0.6 1.38 1.88 1.73 2.33 3.76
Europe 1.11 2.02 2.26 1.92 3.32 3.89 4.36 5.59 3.83
North America 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.23 0.22 0.42 0.14 1.31 1.27
South America 0.3 0.53 0.48 0.43 0.75 0.46 0.42 3.03 1.59

 

Reported occupational sickness levels vary between regions due to differences in industry composition, regulatory standards, and access to healthcare. Cultural attitudes towards reporting workplace-related illnesses and socioeconomic factors also play a  role in the disparities. Efforts to improve healthcare access can help promote healthier working environments worldwide.