The Classification of Accidents for Employees of Enterprises (GB T 6441-1986) was issued on May 31, 1986 and implemented on February 1, 1987. China initially issued national standards, regardless of mandatory and recommended standards, the "Standardization Law" was promulgated in 1988 and began to be promulgated and implemented in April 1989, after evaluation, the "Classification of Accidents of Enterprise Employees" (GB T 6441-1986) was determined to be a recommended standard, but because the standard has not been revised at present, the text has not been modified.
Responding Department: Standards and Technology Management Division
Date: 2020-03-18
You may be familiar with GB6441, but few people know that when this standard was drafted,The old-timers also wrote a long paragraph of preparation instructions in front of the standard, and it was also very pertinent and realistic to explain some doubts about the norms, but with the change of years and the sharpness and political considerations of the sentences in this preparation instructions, they have basically been lostIn the archives of the Shanghai Emergency Management Bureau, I found the original for everyone to share with you, and I believe that you will benefit a lot after reading.
The standard for the classification of accidents for enterprise employees is proposed by the Ministry of Labor and PersonnelYear MonthI entrust it to me. In order to grasp the characteristics of the accident in the southern province, we selected Sichuan Province and checked the accident files for the past three consecutive years. From the survey, we have become more clear about the practical significance of formulating standards. In reviewing the case files, we have experienced the shortcomings of the current statistical methodology, from the recurrence of tragic accidents one after another. Combined with the law of accident investigation and analysis in China, and with reference to the data of the United States, Britain, Japan, the Soviet Union and other countries, the "Classification Standards for Accidents of Enterprise Employees" was compiled.
Why is it 81 years to start this matter, the actual current work of the people should be very little clear, in 81 years of July 9, a major accident occurred on the Chengkun line, resulting in exceeding240 people diedHe is a passenger in the history of Chinese railways**The most tragic accidentAt the same time, the Chengkun line was interrupted for 15 days, this accident is very educational and warning, and if you are interested, you can search for the Liziyida accident to read.
Application and significance of the concept of lost working days
The application of the concept of "lost working days" is a key partHow to tell the difference between a serious injuryAt present, the research work in this area is not mature, but it can be roughly set according to the regulations of the provincial labor departments on serious injuries, the "inspection and evaluation of disability grades" of the civil affairs departments, the classification of the degree of injury by the forensic doctors of the public security departments, and the value of disability compensation in foreign countries. As long as the degree of injury is clearly distinguished, the statistics of lost working days are much simpler, and off-balance sheet temporary disabling injuries are still calculated according to the number of days off-work, and permanent injuries are calculated according to the prescribed number of lost working days, which can effectively avoid the influence of subjective factors.
The value of "lost working days" should be determined in accordance with the actual situation of the country's security efforts. For example, the formula for determining the number of days lost in the dead is:
(Retirement).
Number of days of work lost.
Number of working days per year (taken
Retirement: Average retirement age (taken).
Death: The average age of the person who died in the accident.
In the event of Japan and the United States, China's data is incomplete and can only be counted temporarilyDue to time constraints, only three units are temporarily set as days.
language
Many people ask, why are we losing 6,000 working days?This old-timer answered for us, at that time, it was simply borrowed from the United States' values, because BLS's ** China can no longer be visited, and it is not sure whether some of the current measures in the United States for lost workdays case fatalities have changed.
A description of the classification of minor injuries and major injuries
What is the boundary between minor injury and serious injury?There are great differences due to the different angles from which people look at the problemIt is difficult to find a convincing objective boundary as a criterion for classification。The issueIt is not only politically charged, but also a complex medical issue。Therefore, the classification of minor and serious injuries should be based on the relevant policies formulated by the state, and the close cooperation of experienced comrades in the medical field is required. Due to the emphasis on the study of accident causes, the importance of minor injuries in accident analysis is increasingly recognized.
Because accidents are accidental, they can result in minor injuries or serious injuries or deaths. From the point of view of preventing accidents, minor injury accidents account for a large proportion of accidents, and sufficient attention should be paid to them.
How to choose the standard for minor injuries is also an important issue. Setting the scope of minor injuries wider will increase the sample size and improve the analytical role of statistical data, but the boundary of minor injuries should not be too wide. What boundaries are good needs to be further studied. According to the practice of China, this standard defines the loss of more than one working day as a minor injury.
The starting point of serious injuries is the minimum level of serious injuries stipulated in the "Opinions on the Scope of Serious Injury Accidents" (Zhong Lao Jiu Zi No. 1) issued by the Ministry of Labor on a trial basis"Foot injury: more than three toes broken" injury, and then convert the lost working days according to the value in the table, this standard is based on the number of days as the starting point of serious injury.
language
How to divide serious injuries and minor injuries, the old-timers gave us a very clear signal, which is not only about politics but also about the medical profession.
A superficial understanding of the types of accidents
AboutAccident Category: The current classification method is still used in this standard。Current accident categoriesNot an ideal classificationThe ideal classification should be carried out under uniform requirements, and should be classified by specialty, or by injury process, or by cause of the accident, so as to facilitate management and analysis. And the current approach is on the issue of "unification".Appears confusing。Such as: lifting injuries, vehicle injuries, boilers, containers, etc. are classified by profession;Drowning, stabbing, poisoning and suffocation, as well as their combined injuries, are classified according to the nature of the injury;Mechanical damage, fire, and water permeability are classified according to the pests;Gunpowder**, gas**, boiler**, container**, and others** are classified according to **causes.
The current classification of accident categories does not have uniform requirements, and it is difficult to determine what its role is. In addition to assigning a name to the accident, what is the role of the current classification in the statistical analysis of accidents?What is the role of safety measures in preventing accidents?For example, the item of "object strike" can be listed as falling objects, flying objects, construction, forestry departments, etc., which can cover all walks of life。Therefore, the figure of "object strike" does not bring any useful insight into safety work. Similar to China's local accident classification method, Japan is often used in the industry, and its role is significant, while China's national orientation is lacking in science. What principles should be followed?It really deserves serious discussion. At present, when a more scientific classification method has not been found, we believe that the current classification method will be used for the time being.
language
When teaching note, I told the students that don't care too much about those classifications, including teachers from other institutions who say all day long that they accidentally touch the wrench on the crane with a power outage and smash the people below to smash the person below, whether it is a lifting machinery accident or an object strike, etc., we did two things at that time, the first is to reflect the original intention of GB6441 to the question group and the original intention of our exam, not to carry out this kind of pedantic to get stuck, so from 2019 onwards, you can see that there is no such twisting question。 The second thing is that we have given the students a clear way to identify them, and they don't have to stick to some explanations from previous years.
The old-timers said when formulating GB6441 that the current classification is lacking in science, so it is wrong to forcibly give it scientificity for the sake of something that lacks science.
Wrapping up
In order to make the standard easy to grasp and easy to implement, we paid attention to the status of domestic labor safety work, considered the existing professional knowledge level of safety personnel, and repeatedly considered the scientificity, feasibility and applicability of the standard. Experienced security workers will find that the methods and steps taken in this standard are familiar to them in their workThis standard is nothing but a consolidation, serialization and high-level summary of historical experience
We thinkThe formulation of national standards, the vision can not only be limited to the domestic, because of the old-fashioned, accommodating the backward state, should try to get closer to the advanced level of foreign countries, especially the international labor safety standards should be preferredIn order to make China's labor protection work and the exchange of the country have a common "technical language", so that our work can be adapted to the needs of work development.