Safety culture has been defined by the Advisory Committee on Safety in Nuclear Installations (ACSNI,1993) as the product of individual and group values, attitudes and beliefs, competencies and patterns of behaviour that determine the commitment to, and the style and proficiency of, an organisation’s health and safety management (HSE, 2005) . While, safety climate is workers' perceptions and perspectives on policies, procedures, and work practices related to safety carried out by management (Ismail, 2015) . Safety climate is often used to describe the more ‘tangible’ outputs of an organisation’s safety culture (Health and Safety Executive (HSE), Offshore Safety Division of the HSE, 2010) . Safety climate analysis through surveys can be used to identify relationships between important dimensions of safety in an organization and how it can contribute to the overall results of safety culture (M.D. Cooper, 2000) . This research was conducted at an oil company called PT. ABC. Occupational accident data of PT. ABC in all production areas (2014-2019) concluded that 71% of accidents occur due to Unsafe act (immediate cause), and 49% due to Human Factor (root cause). In this research, the author will analyze the application of safety climate in offshore production areas. The results of observations show that there are differences in the application of safety climate aspects among workers based on shift schedule, position, status of workers, duration of work in offshore, and work experience. These data are the focus of the author to be used as research material in analyzing safety climate. The research conducted is mixed methods research in which some data will be assessed quantitatively and some will be assessed qualitatively. The results of the study were analyzed descriptively with in-depth analysis. The tool used to analyze aspects of the safety climate is the "Offshore Safety Climate Assessment Toolkit" developed by Loughborough University which divides workers' perceptions into three types, namely perception as individuals, perceptions as work units, and perceptions as company members. This method uses a questionnaire media that involves 95 respondents (the entire population) and interviews with several of the company's safety responsibility stakeholders as targets. From the safety climate analysis results obtained 8,16 values, where this can be interpreted that the workers' perceptions of safety values are well internalized within workers both as individuals, as work units and as members of the company. Statistical calculations concluded that there were no significant differences in the application of work safety climate between 18 workers with a rhythm schedule of 2 weeks on / off, and 2 weeks on-1 week off (p (0,263)> 0.05) , workers with staff and non-staff positions (p (0,794)> 0.05), workers with indefinite time employment agreements and workers with certain time work agreements (p (0,881)> 0.05), workers with short term offshore employment and long term workers (p (0,953)> 0.05), and young / fresh graduate and experienced / experienced workers (p (0,065)> 0.05). There were significant differences in the application of work safety climate between workers with a rhythm schedule of 3 weeks on / off, and 2 weeks on-1 week off (p (0,000)< 0.05) and between workers with a rhythm schedule of 3 weeks on / off, and 2 weeks on/ off (p (0,003)< 0.05)