Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 30 October 2007 20:16:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Healthy Debate "All accidents are preventable"...so the client-pleasing slogan goes. It's a statement, but one that is loaded with HSE-promotional-carrier-bags of intent. So, two thoughts on this: 1) Would you really enjoy working in place that was so fanatical about safety that no accidents ever occured. Imagine the control measures! 2) Due to the inability of us humans to predict 'everything' we NEED some accidents to be able to learn how to prevent them a) happening again and b) turning in to more serious ones. Something of a paradox, I know. Debate herewith encouraged.
Admin  
#2 Posted : 30 October 2007 21:23:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Garry Adams Are all accidents preventable , Eemmm that one is well worthy of healthy debate. Firstly, lets start with a definition of an accident, for the purposes of this debate I shall elect to cite Plato's definition, Quote, That which happens blindly without intelligent design, End Quote. All accidents are preventable, this may be achieved by dissemination of information and education. However , as we all know one cannot legislate against human error and there lays the paradox, it is Mankind's frailty that is the weakest link. This Forum can play its part in the education of all and sundry by adopting an open door approach to the esoteric teachings of the World of Health and Safety.
Admin  
#3 Posted : 30 October 2007 21:42:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Pete48 Of course we have had this debate many times before. Maybe why there has not been a huge response or maybe the time of day? To answer your questions. 1.) Been there, done it, got the "t" shirt, made the video. However, it is not the world you picture. Fanaticism is not evident, control measures are appropriate, usable and used. Sadly as humans we are the best systems going and all the best systems are self defeating; so we keep improving the system until we have an accident and thats what happens after a variable period. They were preventable but we chose not to prevent them for whatever reason. 2.) This just doesn't make any sense to me. Surely it is because we think we can predict things that accidents eventually happen; not the other way around? And learning from accidents should be the next myth of the month on the HSE website, we don't do it. We may change things in the short term but eventually good old human initiative gets the upper hand and we go around the circle again. Pick your own examples to illustrate the point. There you go, expect incoming.....
Admin  
#4 Posted : 30 October 2007 21:48:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Brian Welch The Zero Accident Philosophy the holy grail of all business? Sounds like it belongs up there with the quality continuous improvement viewpoint. Sometimes within continuous improvement you have to accept that staying constant is in itself an achievement. Let’s face it we all strive to reduce accidents to the lowest possible levels; however, efforts and resources will be dispensed based upon risk, its no good watching the ants as the elephants walk by. The concept that ALL accidents are preventable is one that starts in the boardroom and they need to provide those down at the coal face more than just fine words to achieve their holy grail. You also need to quantify your accidents within your zero accident philosophy; do you use RIDDOR reportable, lost time or all accidents down to paper cuts? As they say production should never compromise safety…I wash my mouth out with soap for even daring to mention such blasphemy… Brian
Admin  
#5 Posted : 31 October 2007 08:59:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By anon1234 Are all accidents preventable? - YES, however the real question is whether you will be able to prevent all accidents. On a case by case basis you can analyse all accidents and come up with something that would have prevented the accident from occurring - whether prior to that accident you would have considered implementing those measures or considered those measures to be appropriate to the level of risk is another matter. Personally I beleieve that all accidents are preventable but all accidents will not be prevented by adopting sensible risk based solutions - precisely because the solutions are risk based there will always a degree (maybe very small) of likelihood that the incident will occur. This then leads to the question, what level of risk is acceptable/tolerable?
Admin  
#6 Posted : 31 October 2007 09:10:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By CFT Man walks along and knee gives way for no apparent reason, this causes a stumble and head bangs on the edge of a wall; results in serious concussion and hospital stay (a real life scenario) How then would this and thousands of events similar every year be preventable?? Oh fine, trip over a raised slab, fix it; trip over a movable obstruction, move it; etc etc Zero tolerance, zero result with thousands of employees? All down to superb control measures, monitoring surveillance etc etc? Nothing to do with being lucky then? In this responders opinion they are not all preventable and I have always considered the statement to be somewhat of a 'no brainer!' CFT (fully expecting some flack)
Admin  
#7 Posted : 31 October 2007 09:19:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By AHS Not according to the Insurance Industry there is always the caveat "Twas an Act of God". Billy Connelly made an amusing film on the subject.
Admin  
#8 Posted : 31 October 2007 09:46:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Tabs All accidents happen because we (humans) like to take processes, environment, actions, and behaviour as close to 'the edge' as we can get away with (or kill ourselves, at which point the edge has been encountered). Take CFT's example: "this causes a stumble and head bangs on the edge of a wall; results in serious concussion and hospital stay". Why didn't we protect the edge of the wall with foam - it was foreseeable that a hard edge would hurt someone. Why was the man walking? We could have had him in a motorised chair, with stabilisers. Ridiculous - but accident prevented. It is a choice we all make or are part of - an environment and life that is practical, not too costly and not too restrictive. Bridges don't have to collapse - they could all be made so thick and strong as to survive thousands of years - but that is expensive, and ugly - so we calculate failure designs and then add safety factors (we even choose what safety factor to add). Safe systems of work are rarely completely safe - but they allow us to do what we need to do within the realms of practicality. Do we build our work environment to withstand an aircrash if we are on a flight path? Do you want to prevent all accidents - well, yes, why not - if it doesn't interfere with life or make life so expensive that we can't continue to make a viable living. I can't see it though. And staying at home doesn't help - I have just done a quick mental count of my own last two or three injuries - and they all happened at home. I might have to bring my bed into work ....
Admin  
#9 Posted : 31 October 2007 09:50:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Bob Shillabeer There is no such thing as an act of God. This what insurance companies have hidden behind for many years. All accidents have acausual factor somewhere alomg the line. True some are very hard to identify and eliminate and some may be impossible, but it doesnt change the fact we must try and identify and controll them. The problem in most cases is identifying the causal factors and controlling them to as low as reasonably practicable by putting adequate control measures in place and training the individual to follow them. Yes some accidents may well still arise but when they do it is the employer's responsibility to make sure they don't happen again. A zero tolerence of accidents is not saying they won't happen but more effort will be taken to ensure they are not repeated.
Admin  
#10 Posted : 31 October 2007 10:20:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Steve Cartwright Definition of an accident. An unforeseen event that causes harm or damage to a person or property. You can discuss it all you like, you will never prevent accidents. Most accidents are foreseeable and preventitive measures have been put in place, i.e. speed limits on roads etc. Yet everyday there are car accidents. Humans you see are not very sensible. They like to take risks. Sometimes they get away with it and sometimes they don't. Jeremy Clarkson once said "if you stuck a 6 inch spike in the middle of your steering wheel instead of an airbag you'd drive a lot more carefully".
Admin  
#11 Posted : 31 October 2007 10:55:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By R Joe Where does HSE stand on this I now wonder - it was not that long ago that in HSE eyes DuPont were all things to all H&S persons and of course 'all accidents are preventable' - but they / we are now purveyors of 'sensible health and safety' where the elimination of all risk is undesirable, unnecessary and unachievable.......... My own view - it's a catchy slogan and all accidents are theoretically preventable in that some 'cause' can be identified with hindsight, but this is NOT the same as 'all accidents CAN be prevented' which it has a habit of morphing into. Is it a useful aspiration - possibly (but debatable), is it likely in reality - no. But I'm very willing to listen to the DuPont counter arguments should an advocate chose to articulate them to us – including, specifically, would the example given of the stumble and struck head count as a recordable accident if it occurred on a DuPont site, along with an office based paper cut - or would it perhaps not be an 'industrial accident' thus preserving the 1,000,000 days since the last accident record of the site? RJ
Admin  
#12 Posted : 31 October 2007 16:21:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Crim How can one foresee the unforeseen? If anyone has the answer to this all accidents may be preventable. Until then ????????
Admin  
#13 Posted : 31 October 2007 16:33:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Aidan Toner Yes Yes Yes Clarkson is correct BUT do we really have to quote HIM on this safety forum. Sadly-steering spikes are his only stated concession to any form of SPEED control ....a truly barbed comment for victims of uncontrolled speed.!!! Ps Consider...-I come into my tv room and Clarkson is already on the sceen.Was it foreseeable.(Yes) Have I experienced loss/suffering (Yes)........Must have been an accident!!!
Admin  
#14 Posted : 31 October 2007 18:21:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Chris Packham As humans we keep pushing the envelope. If we hadn't we would still be living in caves and attempting to run from that sabre-toothed tiger. If we do keep pushing the envelope then inevitably we will encounter that factor that we could not have foreseen as the knowledge simply was not yet there. All accidents are preventable? By the very definition, how can they be? Chris
Admin  
#15 Posted : 31 October 2007 18:41:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By CFT Aiden "chill man, go easy, deep breaths and a lie down should do it" lol CFT
Admin  
#16 Posted : 31 October 2007 18:46:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Pete48 Of course it is not practicably true for most places at most times and it never can be in reality for all the reasons we have recorded here. BUT and it is a big but, we have been able to move a lot of people towards and beyond better and better accident prevention and reduction as a result of having it as a banner. It never was a target, just a vehicle to improve the lamentable approach to those two precepts.
Admin  
#17 Posted : 01 November 2007 09:29:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Sally Perhaps the question shouldn't be are all accidents preventable but it is desirable to prevent all accidents? The principles of sensible risk management are about putting reasonable control measures in place to prevent significant injuries. I work with schools and our biggest number of accidents come from children playing in the playground. Of course we make sure that they can't fall from heights, that trip hazards are removed etc but to prevent any injuries I would need to ban running around as this is biggest single cause factor. Should I be doing this - I believe some American schools do? Or should I and parents be accepting that grazed knees and the occasional cut head or fractured wrist are inevitable?
Admin  
#18 Posted : 01 November 2007 10:01:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Raymond Rapp As the previous respondent has alluded, all accidents are not preventable and if they were the controls would be undesirable. Many people take risks as part of their every day life, whether at work or outside of it. I think the safety profession and the regulators do not fully appreciate the subtleties of the concept. Unfortunately, accidents and the causal factors are easy to identify after the event. This creates a climate of re-activeness, which is often incongruous to the notion of proactive safety management. Ray
Admin  
#19 Posted : 01 November 2007 12:00:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Colin Reeves Sally said "Perhaps the question shouldn't be are all accidents preventable but it is desirable to prevent all accidents?" Using an analogy, on the box yesterday was an erudite professor stating that alcohol caused cancer, do not drink. He then went on to say that some alcohol is beneficial against heart disease. Preventing accidents may have unforseen consequences so the concept of stopping all accidents may not always be in our interests! Colin
Admin  
#20 Posted : 01 November 2007 14:02:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John J Surely it's all about desirable targets. If I set myself a taget of only having 10 accidents a year does that not say I'm accepting less than I should. I remember one of our managers in a discussion about apprentices saying that it was natural that they cut their hands as it was part of the learning process. Once they had done it they would learn it hurt and not do it again. When it was suggested we line them up on their first day and slash their hands with a stanley (other knives are available) knife to get it done with it was greeted with horror. Effectively that's what we were doing. A good look at the accidents allowed us to implement suitable controls. Result zero accidents. I still do the lottery, I don't expect I'll definitely win but I keep trying. John
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.