Downsizing, rightsizing, resizing, ... capsizing?

By John V. Currie -- Logistics Management, 5/1/1999

Anyone who hasn't heard the terms "downsizing," "rightsizing," or "resizing" in the past few years must have been living in a closet in the Biosphere! Most of us know all too well what they mean: Responding to mandates from stockholders, management is reducing the workforce in an attempt to turn the company into a "lean machine" that does more for less. The current economy seems to demonstrate that this strategy has been successful.

The downsizing trend has led to an alarming situation in the field of hazardous-materials transportation. Although both the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and the European Union recognize that trained hazmat safety professionals prevent accidents and require employers to provide training and testing for employees who handle or manage hazardous materials, we may be letting corporate hazmat expertise slip away--if the phone calls and e-mail I receive daily are any indication.

My contacts include both large and small shippers and carriers of all types of hazmat products, from "consumer commodity" shipments to bulk containers. Lately, hardly a week goes by without a call from someone saying that he or she has been "downsized."

In some cases, the responsibility for regulatory compliance has been lumped together with other duties on an existing employee's all-too-full plate. It's likely that the overload will be nearly impossible to manage without letting something fall through the cracks.

In other cases, the position simply has been eliminated. Some companies hire an entry-level employee to assume the regulatory-compliance function, often without benefit of previous training. Although we all applaud promoting employee growth and recognize that an eager new employee may quickly learn the trade, the lack of knowledge and expertise during the transition period could lead to disaster. A single serious hazmat incident has been known to sink some previously stable businesses.

Why are hazmat professionals so vulnerable to downsizing? Companies typically consider various criteria when restructuring human resources. Primary among these are productivity of the function and "cost of delivery," which in most cases includes age and seniority factors that affect salaries.

It's hard to measure the productivity of safety professionals because they are judged not on tangibles like sales revenues, but on what does not happen, i.e., how well they prevent problems from occurring. How can we quantify the cost of what might have happened if there had been no safety-compliance manager on the job? Who's to say, for example, how much fines that were never levied would have totaled, or how much the personal-injury or wrongful-death settlement that was never adjudicated might have been, or what impact the media headlines might have had on revenues? The best we can do is approximate numbers based on published penalty reports.

The trend of "turning the experience out to pasture" in an effort to trim budgets may be undermining the very foundation of government and industry goals for hazmat safety. I would caution the management of any company that is shipping or transporting any hazardous material to measure their exposure to risk against the budget allocation for ensuring compliance.

John V. Currie has taught numerous college courses, industry training programs, and public seminars on hazardous-materials transportation management and regulatory compliance. His firm, Currie Associates Inc., provides safety and compliance audits, consulting services, customized training manuals, and public and in-house seminars. He may be contacted at 1118 Bay Road, Lake George, NY 12845. Phone: (518) 761-0668. E-mail: mail@currieassociates.com. Web site: www.currieassociates.com.