Hi,

The interviewer inquired about the control measures pertaining to the man-machine interface in construction. Consequently, when there is an interview, I am particularly anxious and unable to respond. My response was similar to segregation, warning alarms for moving equipment, PPE consisting of a high-visibility garment, training, and supervision, lighting. The interviewer included a safety distance.

Was my reply adequate? If we could add more, I would greatly appreciate your suggestion.

Unless this was a supplementary question that clearly showed context, it sounds like a very poorly worded question as it could be interpreted in so many different ways.

Kate's response is entirely appropriate, but I would have interpreted the question in similar terms you have done, for the simple reason that Plant v Pedestrian/Cyclist is a well documented cause of deaths and serious injuries on construction sites and in the offsite logistics that takes materials to site and waste from site.

....and Man-machine interface could also include somebody working on a machine that DOESN'T move - a circular saw bench (Machinery guarding, dust etc etc) or a hand held power tool (Noise and Vibtation etc etc).

The only possible justification for such an interview question is that it might open up the opportunity for the interviewee to show their understanding of a range of risks!! But it would be difficult for the interviewer to maintain structure to the conversation.

When I stood on a demolition site one very wet afternoon and climbed up the steps to the outside of the cab of the crane to get slightly higher up to take a picture of the structure from which someone had fallen to their death, I slipped and dropped my camera - in the broadest sense of the wording this was something to do with "Man-machine interface" - your choice as to whether the "machine" was the crane, the camera or both!!!