Figure 1. Comparative Age Demographic (n = 166).

Figure 1. Comparative Age Demographic (n = 166).

Figure 2. Participating Organizations.

Figure 2. Participating Organizations.

Figure 3. Comparative Participation by Roles.

Figure 3. Comparative Participation by Roles.

Figure 4. Safety Communication Average Scores by Participants (n = 166).

Figure 4. Safety Communication Average Scores by Participants (n = 166).

Figure 5. Estimated Marginal Means Distribution by Organization Safety Communication.

Figure 5. Estimated Marginal Means Distribution by Organization Safety Communication.

Figure 6. Estimated Marginal Means Distribution by ORGANISATION for Safety Communication.

Figure 6. Estimated Marginal Means Distribution by ORGANISATION for Safety Communication.

Figure 7. Communication Safety Perceptions by COVID and AGE Factors (n = 166).

Figure 7. Communication Safety Perceptions by COVID and AGE Factors (n = 166).

Figure 8. (a) Hazard observation rate by COVID Phase, (b) Hazard observation rate under different Project Leaders.

Figure 8. (a) Hazard observation rate by COVID Phase, (b) Hazard observation rate under different Project Leaders.

Figure 9. (a) Total incident rate by COVID Phase, (b) Total incident rate under different Project Leaders.

Figure 9. (a) Total incident rate by COVID Phase, (b) Total incident rate under different Project Leaders.

Figure 10. (a) Supervisor observation & intervention rate by COVID Phase, (b) Supervisor observation & intervention rate under different Project Leaders.

Figure 10. (a) Supervisor observation & intervention rate by COVID Phase, (b) Supervisor observation & intervention rate under different Project Leaders.

Figure 11. (a) MAP check rate by COVID Phase, (b) MAP check rate under different Project Leaders.

Figure 11. (a) MAP check rate by COVID Phase, (b) MAP check rate under different Project Leaders.

Table 1. Project Details.

Table 1. Project Details.

Project ParametersDetailsLocationPilbara Western AustraliaScopeInfrastructure–earthworks, rail formation, tunnel, and bridgesContract ModelProcure, ConstructContract StructureJoint Venture–self perform with specialist sub-contractorsWorkhours1,120,000 with 270 persons on site at peakDurationTotal: 23 months. On site: 16 monthsValue>$500 k AUD

Table 2. Structure of Safety Perception Survey.

Table 2. Structure of Safety Perception Survey.

Organizational ElementsLikert Scale Units–Group of QuestionsCompany (ORG Avg)Management Commitment (MC Avg)
Communication (COM Avg)
Rules and Procedures (RUL Avg)
Overall Safety ClimateTeam (TEAM Avg)Supportive Environment (SUP Avg)
Supervisory Environment (VIS Avg)
Workers Involvement (WI Avg)Individual (IND Avg)Personal Appreciation of Risk
Work Hazard Identification (HAZ Avg)
Work Pressure (WKP Avg)
Competence (CMP Avg)Context QuestionsSafety Risks
Safety Improvements

Table 3. Summary of Project Safety Performance Data-Risk Management Activities (Weekly).

Table 3. Summary of Project Safety Performance Data-Risk Management Activities (Weekly).

MeasureUnitPersonal Risk Assessments% completed aHazard Reports% completedSupervisor Observations and Interventions% completedMajor Accident Prevention (MAP) Critical Control Checks% completedMajor Accident Prevention (MAP) Audits% completedExposure hoursCountTotal number of incidentsCountTotal incident frequency ratesFrequency rate b

Table 4. Safety Climate Survey Likert Scale & Organization Elements ANOVA Results.

Table 4. Safety Climate Survey Likert Scale & Organization Elements ANOVA Results.

Factor: COVID-19 (df 1:154)Likert ScaleSum SquaresMean SquareF ValuesPr (>F)SignificantCommunication4.4554.45512.063<0.001YesSupporting Environment0.0000.000030.00010.994-Work Hazard Identification0.0580.0580.1070.744-Workers Involvement0.5000.50031.0870.299-Individual Element0.0320.0320.1220.727-Team Element0.0030.0030.0080.929-Factor: ORGANIZATION (df 2:154)Likert ScaleSum SquaresMean SquareF valuesPr (>F)SignificantCommunication0.0280.0280.7720.782-Supporting Environment2.2741.1372.1680.118-Work Hazard Identification4.6234.6238.5150.004YesWorkers Involvement2.7822.7816.0420.015YesIndividual Element1.0181.0183.9160.049YesTeam Element2.1952.1946.9660.009YesFactor: GENDER (df 2:154)Likert ScaleSum SquaresMean SquareF valuesPr (>F)SignificantCommunication0.3840.1920.5950.594-Supporting Environment0.2870.1430.2720.761-Work Hazard Identification0.0620.0310.0570.944-Workers Involvement0.2340.1170.2540.776-Individual Element0.0080.0040.0150.985-Team Element0.3260.1630.5170.597-Factor: AGE (df 6:154)Likert ScaleSum SquaresMean SquareF valuesPr (>F)SignificantCommunication3.9150.6521.7670.109 *Outliers skewSupporting Environment11.0391.8393.5080.003YesWork Hazard Identification1.9960.3330.6130.719-Workers Involvement3.3700.5611.2190.299-Individual Element1.0000.1670.6410.697-Team Element3.7520.6351.9840.071 *Outliers skew

Table 5. Safety Communication by Age Group Estimated Marginal Means Across COVID Phase.

Table 5. Safety Communication by Age Group Estimated Marginal Means Across COVID Phase.

Age Group Estimate Marginal MeanStandard ErrorT ValuePr (>[t])30–390.0690.1400.4950.62140–4903590.1602.2460.02650–590.1290.1650.7810.43660–690.3620.2041.7720.078 1

Table 6. Safety perceptions for Work Hazard Identification and Workers Involvement.

Table 6. Safety perceptions for Work Hazard Identification and Workers Involvement.

Likert ScaleF ValuePr > (F)Emmeans (Principal Contractor/Subcontractor)Work Hazard Identification8.5150.004−0.428Workers Involvement6.0420.016−0.298

Table 7. Organizational Factors for Team and Individual Elements of Safety Perceptions.

Table 7. Organizational Factors for Team and Individual Elements of Safety Perceptions.

Likert ScaleF ValuePr > (F)Emmeans (Principal Contractor/Subcontractor)Team6.9840.009−0.304Individual3.9160.049 *−0.214

Table 8. Summary of Significance by Safety Climate Measure and Project Factors.

Table 8. Summary of Significance by Safety Climate Measure and Project Factors.

Safety Climate
MeasureProject Factors COVIDOrganizationAgeGenderSafety communicationYesYesYes *-Supporting environment--Yes-Work Hazard Identification-Yes--Worker Involvement-Yes--Individual-Yes--Team-Yes--

Table 9. Safety Performance for COVID and LEADER Factors–ANOVA Results.

Table 9. Safety Performance for COVID and LEADER Factors–ANOVA Results.

Factor: COVID-19 (df 1:68)Performance IndicatorSum SquaresMean SquareF ValuesPr (>F)SignificantHazard Observations0.1640.1640.8190.369-Supervisor Observations7.7697.7698.1920.0056YesCritical Control Verifications0.5430.5430.2950.589-Total Incident Rate703,387703,38719.9373.096 × 10−5YesFactor: ORGANIZATION (df 2:154)Performance IndicatorSum SquaresMean SquareF valuesPr (>F)SignificantHazard Observations7.6247.62438.6873.49 × 10−8YesSupervisor Observations6.4016.4016.7490.011YesCritical Control Verifications33.73733.73718.3565.905 × 10−5YesTotal Incident Rate19,05919,0590.5400.469-