11/23/09
Hi All -
Tonight’s episode of Dirty Jobs is a repack called Safety Third. In it, I look back at some of the bumps and bruises we’ve accumulated in the process of putting this show together and offer a few observations about the role of risk in the workplace. The observations made are mine and no one else’s, except where attributed, and reflect nothing but my own experience over the last five years.
Like Brown Before Green, the expression itself – “Safety Third!” – has already prompted some to accuse me of deliberately trying to stir up trouble – a charge to which I happily admit. (Few things on television are less interesting than people doing and saying things that no one ever doubts or questions.) However, my main goal in saying “Safety Third” is not to pick a fight – honest. I genuinely believe that safety in the workplace is a really important topic – critical in fact – and worth an honest conversation. However, that conversation is often stifled by a rigid set protocols and rote procedures that discourage flexibility and sometimes, common sense.
The points I thought were important to make are all addressed in the wraps but if history is any indicator, I’ll be hearing from people who object to the overall tenor and tone or perhaps misunderstand the most important aspect of this show. I don’t mind being disagreed with, but I hate to be misunderstood. So permit me to spell out the most important point right here, and please, feel free to pass it on to those who have concluded something different.
Here it is:
The goal of saying “Safety Third” is no different than saying “Safety First”. In both cases, the desired outcome is the avoidance of injury or calamity in the course of doing a job.
So then, why question the universal wisdom of Safety First? Why poke the bear? There are several reasons, but here are the most important, repeated here for posterity. (Or at least, for the immediate present.) I hope they help clarify my position.
1. “Safety First” discourages personal responsibility. Is it reasonable to assume that someone would hire you to work in a hazardous environment, and then tell you that nothing is more important to them than your personal safety? Of course not. Difficult and dangerous jobs are accomplished by people who are willing to assume risk – and the assumption of that risk must come before anything else. Lawyers and insurance adjusters and government agencies have altered that simple equation by perpetuating the belief that your employer might actually care about your safety more than you. That’s dangerous, in my opinion, (even if it’s sometimes true.) Mitigating risk makes good financial sense, in the same way that wearing a harness at 600 feet makes good common sense. But telling an employee that his Safety comes before everything else sends a mixed and somewhat suspicious message. The fact is, companies don’t go out of business when people get hurt. (Well, rarely.) They go out of business when they run out of money. (Bailouts notwithstanding.) Wouldn’t it be more honest, (and possibly more effective) for a boss to say to an employee, “Look Joe, this is a business and if you get hurt on the job, our insurance premiums will go through the roof. Productivity will suffer. OSHA will fine us or maybe shut us down. Our profit and your personal safety happen to be tied together, but don’t be confused by that coincidence. Our motivation is profit. Your motivation is a paycheck. We’re not your parents and you’re not a child. Let’s be clear about why we’re each here and let’s not mess that up with a careless and stupid injury.”
2. “Safety First” is just not true. If Safety were really more important than catching crab, we’d have no crab. If Safety were really more important than construction, we’d have no buildings. If Safety were more important than washing windows, we’d have dirty windows. If Safety were really and truly first, we’d all wear helmets and wrap ourselves in bubble pack and drive rubber cars at speeds of 10 miles per hour assuming we ever left the house in the first place, which of course, we wouldn’t. There are many things that we value above a sense of safety – convenience, speed, efficiency, fast-food, sex, roller coasters, motorcycles, rushes of adrenaline, and of course, getting the job done. Certainly, all of these things can be pursued with varying levels of care and I’m all for taking prudent precautions. But telling me that my safety is more important than my willingness to assume the inherent risk just doesn’t follow. Without risk, there is no need for safety. And of course, there is always risk. Risk is everywhere. It can be understood and managed, but never eliminated. Risk is first.
3. “Safety First” has become a platitude. For five years, I have seen Safety First banners hanging in factories and construction sites all over the country. Hundreds of them. At first, it worked. It got my attention and made me feel more aware. It also made me feel good to think that so many people were concerned for my wellbeing. However, when you see the same thing day after day or hear the same message repeatedly, it starts to lose its relevance. It becomes rote. As a mantra, Safety First is effective only to the extent that it gets my attention, and reminds me to stay focused and aware. When it loses that impact, complacency sets in and complacency – with the possible exception of stupidity and bad luck – is the biggest threat to coming home in one piece. Safety First has become predictable and for me, those ubiquitous banners are now all but invisible. Safety Third, however, gets attention. It stimulates conversation. It demands an explanation. It makes people say, “What the heck are you talking about?” And that, in my opinion, is a good thing.
From what I’ve seen, the key to personal safety is personal accountability and it seems to me the most genuine way to foster that in a grown-up employee is to tell them the truth. If Safety were really first, companies would pay their employees to be safe. Of course, they don’t. They pay them to work, and to assume risk. Saying “Safety Third” reminds me of that simple fact. And that keeps my crew and me more focused, and hopefully, more safe.
As always, thanks for watching.
And for cryin’ out loud, be careful!
Mike
21 Comments
Thanks Mike. Sorry I missed the episode. I’m going to have to hunt it down. As for your comments, I couldn’t agree more. Hazard Recognition is a skill to develop, not a topic to lecture. Thanks for explaining your points so clearly.
We have huge Ad campaigns on Australia regarding this exact problem. The whole attitude of “I’ll get to it tomorrow” is far too often taken resulting in huge amounts of workplace incidents. When you travel to these places Mike do you of have you ever said “NO way” its just too unsafe. Just like in the salt mine with all the particulate in the air and such a flippant attitude by the company. IF you do go into an “unprotected” workplace how do the employeees feel and how do you feel? Could this be a opportunity for yourself to highlight workplace safety? Scary thought that people have to work like that but a buck is a buck as some say. I am looking forward to your next season and also to when to visit us in Australia like Oprah!!!!!!
Mike, as a role model surely you have a responsibility to demonstrate best practice. I’m involved in Occupational Hygiene and I’ve seen you wear hearing and respiratory protection sometimes but not others or sometimes not wear them correctly. I agree with your take on the overly communicated safety message when clearly, for most organisations, its production first but there’s nothing wrong with the methods used to mitigate risks or control hazards. Your show is awesome and I understand you put a lot of effort into risk management but you don’t always look safe and you have definitely damaged your hearing (see underground coal mining episode and many others). Won’t you consider putting your amazing ability to articulate the spoken word to good use and affect a positive safety and health message? You’re in a perfect position and a small well timed comment here or there would have a huge effect. Safety third and company lip service aside, you are in a privileged position, namely, a very popular series involving dangerous jobs. No harm will come from promoting health and safety.
If the employee gets paid for taking a risk, then he should sign a release that exonerates the employer from any liability provided the equipment is certified as conforming to all safety regulations.
as an RA (resident advisor) for two college years, a year as an assistant residence hall director, and two years a a professional hall director, let me tell you this: blood-borne pathogen training is absurd…and i say that in the same vein as “safety third.”
by my third year, i was responsible for delivering that training (oy!). i tossed the “presentation manual” and started every session with this: “there are two rules. 1) do not play with other people’s bodily fluids. 2) do not play with anything that looks like other people’s bodily fluids–if you don’t know if it’s mountain dew or urine, assume the worst.” after the shocked look, then the quiet pause, i would 100% of the time get a room full of laughter. (i would then, legally, have to explain the rest of it.) but i got their attention and delivered the message.
common sense, people. it’s a beautiful thing.
Safety is an important issue, but you can cut off your finger preparing dinner, or doing a home project. Accidents do happen.
I have worked in construction, manufactureing, and sales. Sales is the most dangerous being on the road all day!
Always been a fan of the show, but today was the first time I had the pleasure of hearing you speak in a video on fora tv. After doing some browsing to learn a little more about you I wound up here. Read the blog, understood and agreed with it and was shocked to see so many negative comments. I’m no OSHA beauracrat or safety director or empolyer. I’m an industrial mechanic at a dirty job, which at times involves risk. My safety is paramount to me. The company I work for has adopted the safety first mantra and training, that, I agree, breeds complacency. An honest discussion of the importance of safety would go alot farther towards prevention of accidents. I can see the benefit of my company’s policies, programs, and documentation, but unfortunately I have the suspicion it is moreso to protect their liability in case of an accident, than to protect me. This is what I preach to my coworkers, that safety is your own responsibility. It is foremost for me as I realize it is my responsibility. Great blog. Keep up the good work, and I’ll now continue my browsing and see what else you have to offer. Thanks Mike.
Mike, that was an outstanding blog–you are right–”Safety First” is exactly what I tell the aircraft mechanics who work for me. But, if it were really true, they wouldn’t run around an F-15 with its engines running! (but we have to… for safety reasons!). You made me think. And hey, that was the point! Thanks.
My family is a fan of your show. When my son attended the FFA Nationals I listen to you keynote presentation on a live feed. I thought you were great! I understand what you are saying about safety 3rd. I do believe that safety is important to keep men and women safe while on the job. But sometimes they take it a little too far. My husband is a construction electrician currently working at a power plant. They have safety meetings, luncheons and family picnics. We even receive mailing on how to stay safe in the home. (I promise I never run with scissors). They have to right in what he calls a redbook any potential hazard every day. There are safety rewards and incentives if there are no accidents in a predetermined amount of time. Do you think there are incidents that go unrecorded due to fear of being reprimanded? Of course it happens! I feel this creates more stress on the job because god forbid if there is an accident there is a huge uproar.
My husband is a great, conscientious, hard working employer and I’m not just saying that because he is my husband. I’ve been married to him for 20-years… trust me I know he has faults. But he takes his job seriously. Last week he lost the tip of his finger. Not because he was being careless but because he did the job that he was told to do. He needed to work in a manhole that was under a trailer. A trailer that the foreman did not want to have moved and there was no equipment available to have it properly removed. In his redbook he recorded that the manhole cover was a potential hazard. When he was replacing the manhole cover at the end of the day it slipped pinching his finger between stairs and the cover. It has been reattached and he has been home for a week. He has received several phone calls from fellow employers. They told him that the big bosses have come to the job to question everyone and to reenact the accident. They were told there are no accidents and that my husband has to be held accountable for losing his fingertip. They have not decided yet but he will be suspended from work anywhere from 2days to 1week without pay.
Safety 1st is a bunch a bull it’s just a way to point a finger and put blame on someone else. Safety is important but there has to be a better way of implementing ways of being safe than constantly being bullied with it. Yes I’m angry and venting my thoughts on the subject.
Mike, I totally understand how the importance of safety may slip down the list of priorities when there is a job to be done and money on the line. The reality for most however, is the need to protect your self and the future of your job by being “safe”. When I began working for the government in a reletivly dirty job one of the first phrases I learned was “cover your self” and “document it”. So safety may be first or third, but what’s really important is that the paper work is done right.
Mike Rowe is an entertainer, first and foremost. That being said, for him to state that if safet were first, there would be no buildings, clean windows, etc is flat out wrong. This is a defeatist, archaic attitude that requires no new thought or persuit of hazard recognition. Every job, no matter how dangerous can be done safely if the people in charge are willing to identify each hazard involved and make a plan to eliminate or reduce the hazards to an acceptable risk. Along with that plan, some money will have to be spent to provide safe equipment to allow the job to be done safely. If a job is done in a manner that puts the worker at risk, it’s only because the old codgers have only one way of doing the job, and are unwilling to allow new ideas in their kingdom. “That’s the way we’ve done it for 50 years!” Iron workers, who have been walking I-beams hundreds of feet above the pavement since the first construction project, are now beginning to work with tie-off requirements. It’s a little inconvenient to be 100% tied off on a construction site, but I’d rather be inconvenienced than dead.
Hard work is what it is all about…so wonderful that you are showing the young ones, cause they just don’t have a clue. Keep doing what your doing and HOPEfully the young ones will wake up and figure it all out. Great show, great web site, your a great guy!
Amazing as always.
Keep posting stuff like this i really like it.
Nice site. This commentary struck me as slightly provocative, but in a good way. Gutsy. Nice to see someone thinking (and speaking) outside the box. To my ears, the article seems to be saying that Safety Third is, in Mr. Rowe’s experience, simply the way things ARE (if not 4th or 5th). Admitting that to ourselves and (if an employer, to our employees) seems the biggest hurdle here. NOT admitting it or presenting it as the truth may be the ‘politically correct’ thing to do, or what an employer feels forced to do. I feel a quandary coming on.
Most compelling to me, however, is that Mr. Rowe breaks out here with some terrifically straightforward speech that seems rare amongst other contributors, from what I’ve managed to take in so far. These are topics and issues that deserve to be looked at from ALL sides, with succinct language (if so desired) that should not have to be apologized for, danced around, justified to nay sayers, ignored or outright dismissed. This style of expression is extremely rare and valuable – both at a site like this and in society. Hopefully it is both permitted and encouraged for all, and by all, who visit mrW. Best. H.S.
Hey Mike: Just one comment about “Safety Third”. I get where you are coming from…understand it completely. Having said that, I wanted to share an interesting fact. I have spent years trying to get more bright young people into the automotive trades; mainly collision repair. When I first set out on this quest I did a little research to find out what roadblocks existed. You know, what were the main concerns these kids and their parents had about exploring such a career. So I performed an unscientific survey. I thought for sure that pay and benefits would be right up at the top, but guess what? That wasn’t even in the top three. Number one: Safety in the workplace…yup. We have raised our kids in the cleanest environment possible. “Always wash your hands, don’t drink tap water,don’t get dirty”, etc… They were concerned with the chemiclals they may breathe and come into contact with. So what I was able to take from that was if employers were serious about finding and attracting young talent, they themselves had to practice safety wihin their businesses. Not like it used to be when I was a collision tech. The painter in my shop hardly ever wore a respirator, but when he did, he had a hole drilled in it that he would cover with duct tape, but in between coats of automotive paint containing high levels of isocynates, he’d pull the tape back allowing him smoke a cigarette while wearing the mask! Gloves? Forget about it! So when new recruits start working in a shop and they wear all the recommended safety equipment, some old painter is standing in the corner yelling “hey guys, look at the spaceman over there!!” And they wonder why these bright young intellegent kids are running away from jobs like that.
So, there’s a big divide between those that have been on the job for a long time, and the newbies entering the trades. I know it’s tough teaching an old dog new tricks, but if we don’t, I’m affraid there won’t be anyone to take their place in the future.
First off, I really enjoyed the Safety Third episode, and I totally get it. Safety First is largely overused anyway. But don’t worry, someone out there will sell someone on a new motto and mantra, and things will seem more serious again (for a time).
Second, I’m one of those safety people, yes, an actual OSHA inspector, often referred to as the bad guys spreading hate and discontent … ie, fining employers and making employees do stuff they don’t want to do. Like wearing hard hats and harnesses and gloves and masks. It doesn’t always make sense, but it mostly does. Some of the stuff Mr. Rowe has done on Dirty Jobs has made me shudder. But he’s the “talent” most of the time, so it’s usually forgiven. Glad I wasn’t around when they were climbing the masts at the Star of India (fortunately out of my jursidiction).
I was laughing myself out of my chair when Mr. Rowe was told he couldn’t operate the crane on the boat because he wasn’t qualified. I often wondered how he’d gotten around that particular conundrum in previous episodes, and was amused that someone finally caught on. In truth I understand that what Mr. Rowe does is entertainment and part of the entertaining value of the show is watching him fail … or barely succeed. Doesn’t mean that he should be hurt or risk hurting others.
And as a motorcycle rider, I understand the inherent nature of risk taking (and risk reduction). But what I do as a private person in assuming certain risks, is totally different from what an employee does.
Only one flaw … and it is a major flaw, in the argument Mr. Rowe makes, is that “Difficult and dangerous jobs are accomplished by people who are willing to assume risk.” These jobs are usually done by people who need a job. There’s a crucial difference there. Some people certainly gravitate to those super risky careers, but nobody wants to go to work thinking he may not go home at the end of the day. Or he may not go home with all of his parts. We rationalize a lot of risk because of whatever need it fulfills, like why I ride the motorcycle instead of taking the truck.
Anyway … love the show, wish I could invite you to one of my dirty jobs. Hope you all stay safe, because I have enough work to do already and I really don’t want to have to investigate any more serious accidents.
dm
As a carpenter and motorcycle rider, that makes sense! Framing structures and riding motorcycles is crazy.
Watching this tonight, was wondering about the billboard job that took two days, part of which was in this episode. Pretty sure that was in Tyler, TX and not in Louisiana (it says Louisiana in this episode).
I completely understand what you are saying Mike but really, at the end of the day, if someone gets hurt, it’s the company who will pay. Big time. I wish we COULD have this conversation with our guys but could you imagine the lawsuit if, God forbid, someone did get hurt? Yikes! “But, they told me Safety was third” We would for sure have to close the doors after that lawsuit. So what is a business owner do to……………….follow the rules and keep posting those “Safety First” posters.