Over the past few years, I have spent a significant amount of time on construction sites and, by the design of the job, have had a significant amount of time to interact with and talk with construction workers, Foremen and Superintendents. I have noticed that Safety Professionals and construction workers have different views of risk on the job and it seems to allow a disconnect to develop between how they both work together to ultimately not get injured or killed while not always agreeing on the way to keep this from happening.
Generally, Safety Professionals define risk in a structured and systematic way, often using specific criteria and methodologies. Safety Professionals consider probability and severity where risk is assessed based on the likelihood of an event occurring and the potential severity of its consequences. This helps prioritize which risks need immediate attention. Safety Professionals use hazard identification to identify potential hazards in the workplace, such as unsafe equipment, hazardous materials, or dangerous work practices. Using risk assessments, Safety Professionals evaluates the identified hazards to determine the level of risk they pose. Tools like risk matrices or quantitative risk assessments are often used. Risk is also defined by the effectiveness of existing control measures. Safety Professionals assess whether current safety protocols are sufficient to mitigate risks. Risks are evaluated in the context of legal and regulatory requirements. Ensuring compliance with safety standards is a critical aspect of risk management for Safety Professionals. The potential impact on workers’ health and safety is a primary concern. Risks are defined by how they can affect physical well-being, mental health, and overall safety. Risk is not static; it requires ongoing monitoring and reassessment. Safety Professionals continuously review and update risk assessments to adapt to changing conditions.
Generally, construction workers define or, more accurately, perceive risk based on their personal experiences and the immediate environment in which they work. To construction workers, risks are often seen in terms of potential physical harm, such as falls, cuts, or injuries from machinery. Workers are acutely aware of the hazards that can cause bodily harm. Some workers might view risk in terms of how it affects their ability to complete tasks efficiently. If a safety measure slows down work, they might perceive it as a risk to their productivity. Construction workers may define risks by their financial implications. For example, taking a shortcut might seem less risky if it means finishing a job faster and/or earning more. The influence of colleagues and supervisors can shape how workers define risk. If risky behavior is normalized or encouraged, workers might downplay the actual dangers involved. Construction workers with more experience might assess risks differently than newer workers. They might rely on their past experiences to judge whether a situation is risky or not. Some workers might focus on immediate risks, such as getting injured today, while others might consider long-term risks, like developing chronic health issues from repeated exposure to hazards.
Some of the reasons that construction workers take risks while completing a task are a combination of beliefs and culture. The main reason this author believes construction workers take risks is they underestimate the dangers associated with certain tasks, believing that accidents are unlikely to happen to them. Other reasons include tight schedules and deadlines that can push workers to take shortcuts or ignore safety protocols to finish tasks on time. These tight schedules and deadlines may be real though are not outrightly told to the workers however the workers can feel the pressure and see how the Foremen and Superintendents run the job differently when under the pressures of tight schedules and deadlines. In some work environments, there might be a company culture or a trade culture that values risk-taking or views it as a sign of dedication and hard work. Construction workers might be motivated by bonuses, overtime pay, or fear of losing their jobs, leading them to prioritize speed over safety. Pressure from colleagues or supervisors can lead workers to take risks to fit in or avoid criticism. One more reason may be that insufficient training on safety procedures can result in workers not fully understanding the risks involved or how to mitigate them.
In a recent conversation with a construction worker, he told me that he cringes when a Safety Person tells him “I want to see you leave today in the same condition that you came” meaning the Safety Person doesn’t want to see the construction worker injured or killed. This construction worker firmly assured me that most construction workers do not want to and do not try to get hurt or killed. They just want to get the job done as soon as they can and as efficiently as they can. My thought is why do Safety Persons think it’s necessary to tell the workers that they want them to go home safe, uninjured, not killed? Is it that the Safety Person doesn’t understand the construction worker or doesn’t believe them or doesn’t actually ‘see’ what the Safety Person believes is a sufficient effort by the construction worker to keep from being injured or killed? Is it because what Safety Persons sees does not necessarily line up with what they think the workers are doing? Safety Persons may think construction workers could care less about whether they get hurt or not, they could care less whether they take risks or not.
Many Safety People try to take the risk out of the job. Wouldn’t it be better to accept that construction workers don’t want to get hurt and that they perceive safety procedures as getting in the way of getting the job done quickly and efficiently. Construction workers may not understand that most safety procedures are in place because of OSHA regulations and most OSHA regulations are in place because a worker has gotten injured or killed hence the procedure, policy, or regulation was put into place by blood. If Safety Persons can get construction workers to think about the risk associated with a task and to identify risk in real time as well as part of the pre-task planning process, corrective actions can be put into place that may not cause the job to stop or cause the task to be temporarily halted while a safer way to do it is determined and implemented. Construction workers need to really understand that even though they have not yet been injured or killed taking that shortcut or practicing that risky behavior, they’re taking unnecessary risks when they do their job based upon they’ve taken that risk before, they’ve taken that shortcut before, they’ve taken that unsafe action before, many times and nothing has happened – they have not gotten injured and they haven’t been killed.
Construction workers accept that their jobs are inherently dangerous though they may not associate that with being risky. The workers understand that they could get hurt. They don’t want to get hurt, yet they strive to get the task done as soon and as efficiently as they can. The question is do Safety Persons understand the thought process of the construction worker? Safety Persons need to get workers to understand the reasons for the policies and procedures are because, even though an incident hasn’t happened yet to the construction worker though it could (has high probability) if they continue to do the risky behavior or the unsafe act. Safety Persons need to get that point across to the construction worker.
To get the construction worker and the Safety Person on the same page to accomplish, ultimately, the same thing of getting nobody injured or killed while getting the job completed soon and efficiently, understanding that there is risk in the task or job, then reducing that risk by controlling or even eliminating the identified hazard or reduce the risk down to such a point that it is minimal and the risk isn’t a possibility that somebody could get hurt.
For Safety Professionals and construction workers to be on the same page about working safely and controlling or reducing risk involves making the concept relatable and understandable from both points of view. Sharing stories of accidents or near-misses that have occurred in similar settings, highlighting the consequences of taking risks, both for the individual and their coworkers, is important. Discuss how taking risks can affect workers health, livelihood, and family. Personalizing the impact can make the risks more tangible or real to the construction worker. Both Safety Persons and construction workers need to engage in hands-on training sessions where they can experience the risks in a controlled environment through simulations. Role-playing can be very effective when both the Safety Person and the construction workers pay roles in various scenarios and situations where they need to act and react in a safe and controlled environment. An open environment needs to be created and maintained on the job where Safety Persons and construction workers feel comfortable asking questions of each other about risks and safety procedures. There needs to be a mutual respect between the Safety Person and construction workers so that each respects the other opinions, perceptions, and points of views. Both Safety Persons and workers need to be encouraged to voice their concerns and opinions regarding safety. A work environment needs to be created and nurtured where both feel comfortable discussing safety issues without fear of repercussions.
The Safety Persons and the construction workers need to understand that they are both trying to accomplish, ultimately, the same thing of getting nobody injured or killed while getting the job completed soon and efficiently.
For more information and/or assistance, contact:
Wayne Vanderhoof CSP, CIT
Sr. Consultant/President
RJR Safety Inc.