• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Safety Risk .net

Humanising Safety and Embracing Real Risk

  • Home
    • About
      • Privacy Policy
      • Contact
  • FREE RESOURCES
    • FREE SAFETY eBOOKS
    • FREE DOWNLOADS
    • TOP 50
    • FREE RISK ASSESSMENT FORMS
    • Find a Safety Consultant
    • Free Safety Program Documents
    • Psychology Of Safety
    • Safety Ideas That Work
    • HEALTH and SAFETY MANUALS
    • FREE SAFE WORK METHOD STATEMENT RESOURCES
    • Whats New In Safety
    • FUN SAFETY STUFF
    • Health and Safety Training
    • SAFETY COURSES
    • Safety Training Needs Analysis and Matrix
    • Top 20 Safety Books
    • This Toaster Is Hot
    • Free Covid-19 Toolbox Talks
    • Download Page – Please Be Patient With Larger Files…….
    • SAFETY IMAGES, Photos, Unsafe Pictures and Funny Fails
    • How to Calculate TRIFR, LTIFR and Other Health and Safety Indicators
    • Download Safety Moments from Human Resources Secretariat
  • PSYCHOLOGY OF SAFETY & RISK
    • Safety Psychology Terminology
    • Some Basics on Social Psychology & Risk
    • Understanding The Social Psychology of Risk – Prof Karl E. Weick
    • The Psychology of Leadership in Risk
    • Conducting a Psychology and Culture Safety Walk
    • The Psychology of Conversion – 20 Tips to get Started
    • Understanding The Social Psychology of Risk And Safety
    • Psychology and safety
    • The Psychology of Safety
    • Hot Toaster
    • TALKING RISK VIDEOS
    • WHAT IS SAFETY
    • THE HOT TOASTER
    • THE ZERO HARM DEBATE
    • SEMIOTICS
    • LEADERSHIP
  • Covid-19
    • COVID-19 (Coronavirus, Omicron) Health and Safety Slogans and Quotes for the Workplace
    • Covid-19 Returning to Work Inductions, Transitioning, Safety Start Up and Re Entry Plans
    • Covid-19 Work from Home Safety Checklists and Risk Assessments
    • The Hierarchy of Control and Covid-19
    • Why Safety Loves Covid-19
    • Covid-19, Cricket and Lessons in Safety
    • The Covid-19 Lesson
    • Safety has this Covid-19 thing sorted
    • The Heart of Wisdom at Covid Time
    • How’s the Hot Desking Going Covid?
    • The Semiotics of COVID-19 and the Social Amplification of Risk
    • Working From Home Health and Safety Tips – Covid-19
    • Covid-19 and the Hierarchy of Control
  • Dr Rob Long Posts
    • Learning Styles Matter
    • There is no HIERARCHY of Controls
    • Scaffolding, Readiness and ZPD in Learning
    • What Can Safety Learn From Playschool?
    • Presentation Tips for Safety People
    • Dialogue Do’s and Don’ts
    • It’s Only a Symbol
    • Ten Cautions About Safety Checklists
    • Zero is Unethical
    • First Report on Zero Survey
    • There is No Objectivity, Deal With it!
  • Quotes & Slogans
    • Researchers Reveal the Top 10 Most Effective Safety Slogans Of All Time
    • When Slogans Don’t Work
    • 77 OF THE MOST CLASSIC, FAMOUS and INFAMOUS SAFETY QUOTES
    • 500 BEST and WORST WORKPLACE HEALTH and SAFETY SLOGANS 2021
    • 167 CATCHY and FUNNY SAFETY SLOGANS FOR THE WORKPLACE
    • COVID-19 (Coronavirus, Omicron) Health and Safety Slogans and Quotes for the Workplace
    • Safety Acronyms
    • You know Where You Can Stick Your Safety Slogans
    • Sayings, Slogans, Aphorisms and the Discourse of Simple
    • Spanish Safety Slogans – Consignas de seguridad
    • Safety Slogans List
    • Road Safety Slogans
    • How to write your own safety slogans
    • Why Are Safety Slogans Important
    • Safety Slogans Don’t Save Lives
    • 40 Free Safety Slogans For the Workplace
    • Safety Slogans for Work
You are here: Home / Ethics / The AIHS BoK and Ethics, Check Your Gut!

The AIHS BoK and Ethics, Check Your Gut!

February 8, 2020 by Dr Rob Long 51 Comments

One of the best ways to be ethical about ethics is to declare your worldview/methodology (ethic) from the outset. It is from one’s ethic (methodology-ontology) that one’s method emerges. In my case whenever I undertake education and learning modules such as the recent modules on Transdisciplinarity and Ethics (https://spor.com.au/home/one-week-intensive-2-modules-february-2020/) I make it very clear that my bias is one of an Existentialist Dialectic. I also make it very clear that there are many other competing worldviews (and I map them, see Figure 1. Mapping Schools of Ethics) and that most people construct combinations of these (unconsciously), eclectically. Unfortunately, people either don’t know their worldview (ontology) or don’t disclose it when they develop discussions on knowledge, learning and ethics. This is the case with the AIHS BoK on Ethics.

Figure 1. Mapping Schools of Ethics (Download here: Schools of Ethics 2 )

image

One thing is clear from analysis of the BoK on Ethics is that its worldview is one of Deontology (https://miami.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/the-problem-we-all-have-with-deontology; http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/introduction/duty_1.shtml) enacted in Masculinism and Utilitarian method. These are not declared in the BoK but are hidden in the text. We can see this even with a simple analysis of language. The most important and repeated language in the BoK is about ‘duty’ (21 times) clearly connected to Deontology and Kantian ethics. Of course, the language of ‘wisdom’ appears nowhere yet the language of ‘obligation’ appears 30 times. The language of compliance appears 10 times and yet the importance of relationship appears 5 times and uncertainty 4 times. There are many comparisons like this that show that the ethic of the BoK are Deontological, Masculinist and Utilitarian. It’s all about power for the professional. For example the language of ‘humble’ and ‘humility’ appear nowhere in the text! Yet the virtue of respect and an orientation of humility are considered by many to be essential to act professionally and engage in discourse with others.

However, we need to do more than just a word search, although language, symbols and grammar are often indicative of an ideological disposition. There are many other indicators in the BoK on ethics that signal alarm bells for an ‘Ethic of Risk’. The elephant in the room for the global safety industry is the ideology of zero. Here we have a publication, a so called ‘body of knowledge ‘ for WHS, and there is no mention of zero! This is despite the fact that zero is now the global ideological mantra (http://visionzero.global/node/6) for an industry consumed with counting, numerics, metrics and the disease of paperwork! Indeed, it is clear the BoK on ethics is anchored to the INSHPO declaration and framework, all informed and shaped by the ideology of zero!

It doesn’t matter what words, systems or structures, procedures or language, symbols or gestures one choses, all carry an implied ethic. There is no activity, mantra or position that is neutral or objective. All humans carry a bias that ought to be declared as an essential to being ethical, also an essential to any safety investigation. Hiding one’s ethic is essentially dishonest and therefore unethical. Such is the nature of the BoK on ethics.

The Deontological ethic of the BoK is clear in discussion about the certainty of objectivity. Therefore if knowledge is certain then duty can be certain. Yet, in the BoK itself this is quite contradictory. We are told on p.31 that humans are biased and subjective yet on pages 18, 32, 55 and 82 we are told that safety people can be objective with ‘facts’. Similarly, by not raising the most important and contentious ideology in the industry – zero, there is a fundamental dishonesty in hiding such a discussion. The implications of hiding zero in a discussion on ethics for the industry is significant and yet the BoK is silent on such. So, zero has nothing to do with being professional! What an amazing silence, for it is zero that drives: numerics, data obesity, fixation on minutia, metrics, counting and connected paperwork and associated ethical problems of: ‘tick and flick’, flooding, fake and dishonest recording, underreporting, blaming and attributions of safety to numerics.

When we were working through the SPoR module this week on an Ethic of Risk we had a number of safety people in the room when we spent some hours critiquing the AIHS BoK on Ethics. What came out of the discussion with safety people in the room was their concern that the very fundamental ethical dilemmas of being a safety person receive no mention in the BoK. The discussion (Figure 2. Discussing Ethics and WHS) raised issues that people considered critical for day to day moral dilemmas for the safety person for example, challenges with:

  1. Uncertainty with ALARP and subjectivity
  2. Speaking up and whistleblowing and authoritarianism
  3. Privacy and mental health
  4. Ambiguities with Due Diligence and inadequate legal knowledge
  5. Lack of holistic training in critical parts of safety work eg. pastoral care
  6. Conforming to the power of superiors and demands to be unethical about: data, reporting, recording and time
  7. Dishonesty associated with ‘turning a blind eye’, prioritizing risks, politicizing risk and dissonance in performing professionally
  8. Power and policing and dissonance with care and understanding others, particularly with mental health issues
  9. Bullying, and demands to be brutalizing in ‘enforcing’ systems, procedures and controls
  10. KPIs linking safety to performance, payment of reward for under-reporting and incentivizing dishonesty

These and many more issues were raised as ethical challenges that served as compromises and pressures on the ability of safety people to act professionally. None of this is discussed in the BoK on Ethics.

Figure 2. Discussing Ethics and WHS

clip_image004

There is so much missing from the BoK on ethics, so many issues of a critical nature to safety people for acting professionally that are not discussed. No mention at all of the challenges of heuristic, implicit thinking as an ethical dilemma with accountability yet, gut thinking is framed as the final step in ethical decision making at section 9.1! No mention of the challenges of social psychological influences and the nature of responsibility. Yet, profound admissions in the text of the that Safety has no remedy for its Machiavellian character and unscrupulous culture! Also an admission that there is no plan for education and learning in ethics in the WHS curriculum! (p.30, 31) Yet, ethics is the soul of professionalism! (p.1). Indeed, the concept of learning gets scant mention within the admission that safety people are not qualified for what they do. Of course, the issue of learning poses a significant moral dilemma for safety, especially in its quest for stasis and objectivity through the ideology of zero.

We also learn in the text of the BoK that safety people are somehow (and naturally) ethically committed. Somehow magically, safety people ‘have an inbuilt desire’ (p.9) (read natural law ethics) to know how to act professionally and ethically without any learning about ethics. What??? What an assertion after already admitting that the industry is entrapped in an ethic of an unscrupulous Machiavellian culture (p. 22, 27).

I’m trying to keep this blog short so just one more issue and in connection to a model for ethical decision making in section 9.1, what an amazing linear model. Here is the model for objective ethical decision making starting with ‘gather the facts’ (what are they?) and finishing with ‘check your gut’. Well, you can’t get any more contradictory than that and without any discussion of gut (implicit) knowledge in the text. So, your gut tells you whether something is right or wrong, the ultimate in a deontological ethic. Rightness, handed down from god and wrestled in the human unconscious and conscience (not discussed in the text). So, in the end I guess one doesn’t need a curriculum on ethics if one is innately morally qualified and simply needs to ‘check the gut’ to get it right.

Good luck.

  • Bio
  • Latest Posts
  • More about Rob
Dr Rob Long

Dr Rob Long

Expert in Social Psychology, Principal & Trainer at Human Dymensions
Dr Rob Long

Latest posts by Dr Rob Long (see all)

  • Culture Silences in Safety Symbolism - May 19, 2022
  • Culture Silences in Safety Mythology - May 16, 2022
  • The Safety Trifecta and Nothing Changes - May 14, 2022
  • Sleep Dysfunction, Dreaming and Safety - May 12, 2022
  • Working Out What Makes Sense in Safety - May 9, 2022
Dr Rob Long
PhD., MEd., MOH., BEd., BTh., Dip T., Dip Min., Cert IV TAA, MRMIA Rob is the founder of Human Dymensions and has extensive experience, qualifications and expertise across a range of sectors including government, education, corporate, industry and community sectors over 30 years. Rob has worked at all levels of the education and training sector including serving on various post graduate executive, post graduate supervision, post graduate course design and implementation programs.

Please share our posts

  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

Related

Filed Under: Ethics, Robert Long Tagged With: AIHS, AIHS BoK on Ethics, transdisciplinarity

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. bernardcorden says

    February 19, 2020 at 10:43 AM

    Whenever I watch major sporting events on television I often notice the beguiling advertisements from major sponsors which promote:

    a( Gambling
    b) Fast food
    c) Soft drinks
    d) Financial services and credit

    It’s not too long before I hit the power button on the remote and pick up a book recommended by Dr Long

    I also notice several sponsors on the AIHS website include recruitment agencies. Indeed most health and safety practitioners will have many horrific war stories regarding their interactions with these organisations and their professional ethics, especially privacy and confidentiality.

    Birds of a feather.

    Reply
  2. bernardcorden says

    February 18, 2020 at 8:23 PM

    $ub$tantive evidence $uggest$ the AIH$ i$ al$o rather economical with the truth.

    Reply
  3. safety gear says

    February 18, 2020 at 5:42 PM

    thanks Dr Rob for sharing that

    Reply
  4. Richard Coleman says

    February 18, 2020 at 11:01 AM

    Firstly the disclosure: I am a Board Member of the AIHS and I volunteered to be the Board Champion for the release of the BOK Chapter on Ethics and Professional practice. I’m grateful to the members that voted for me and my Board colleagues who entrusted me with this task.

    As I read the comments it strikes me that they fall into two buckets:
    1. The chapter is poor quality
    2. The AIHS is broken because it won’t formally disavow ‘Zero’

    My view is that this chapter has the potential to take the profession forward in ways that no other chapter has to date. The discussions that I facilitated at both the Sydney and Melbourne were energetic, they focus on key ethical challenges that professionals face and were genuinely developmental. The chapter may not be perfect but it’s clearly written, it deals with issues that we all commonly face, it provides an entry into a domain of knowledge and practice that may people need.
    Accepting for a moment that the premise is correct. Then that issue is at heart an ethical one. The development of the chapter therefore provides a mechanism for a more nuanced discussion about positions that the Institute takes.

    Richard Coleman
    GM HSE
    Laing O’Rourke

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 18, 2020 at 1:13 PM

      Richard, thanks for your contribution and especially acknowledging your identity and connections. I think you have identified 2 of several issues with the BoK on Ethics although much could be written on many other chapters of the BoK too and their worldview. In the case of this particular chapter on ethics it is also problematic because the writers do not acknowledge their own deontological bias and present such a closed ethical paradigm as somehow endorsed as normative. It also endorse some extremely naive notions associated with safety people as somehow innately ethical and making decisions by the gut. Much more could be written about such problems and what such discussion endorses.
      If the industry is to be professional and act professionally it must be far more transparent with such worldviews and own them with some form of justification or, at least acknowledge other worldviews and their validity. It is also interesting that this chapter acknowledges that ethics is ‘the soul of professionalism’ yet it arrives years late and is not chapter 1? Indeed, an indictment of where ethics sits within the industry.
      Having developed and taught ethics in several contexts I was amazed at the nature of the paper and how narrow its focus, I think Safety needs to step much further outside of its closed discipline if it is to develop something more professional. Having said that, I acknowledge the developmental discourse the AIHS attaches to the BoK and hopefully the AIHS value criticism from outside in that nature that it offers a constructive and valid approach from outside of its camp. If the AIHS is to value critical thinking as a mark of professionalism it must learn to embrace such risky conversations.
      The issue of zero is of course much more profound and significant that just a goal or number, from another worldview it is understood as a shibboleth and ideology that now controls the industry so much so, it cannot let go of it. Indeed, it holds the power of a religious artefact and now defines all that is taboo to its boundaries. This sustains the nature of binary oppositional discourse and the identity by poles of such opposition jeopardizing conversation, debate, criticism and dissent. The binary oppositional view of zero unfortunately limits learning and engagement, demonsising politically any criticism.
      The omission of discussion of zero in the BoK is very significant also because zero ideology proclaims there is no other ethical view. There are of course other worldviews to zero but none of this is a discussed in the BoK, quite a significant oversight given the global industry is now deeply wedded to it.
      At this stage of my working life I only work with organizations who will devolve from zero and work with far more humanising discourse and language about risk. I have found such an approach brings great relief from the associations and by-products of zero toxicity.
      Thanks for your open note and happy to discuss or meet personally should you be in canberra some time.
      Rob

      Reply
  5. bernardcorden says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

    Scotty from marketing here:

    http://visionzero.global/events-and-trainings

    Reply
  6. bernardcorden says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

    But wait there’s more, straight from the AIHS website (22/08/2018)..…….

    At the conclusion of the event, the International Security Association will launch its VisionZero campaign in Australia. This is the first global campaign to improve safety, health and wellbeing at work; acknowledges that no-one from any nation should lose their life at work.

    https://www.aihs.org.au/events/safety-governance-how-informed-your-board-about-managing-damage

    Reply
  7. Rob long says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

    2020 March.
    https://www.safetyinaction.com/event/b65e0c62-6fba-4235-819a-4b7c7c249fbb/summary

    Safety in action conference for a zero incident future. Hmmm, must be old news.

    So many examples of zero trending across the world and Australia it’s overwhelming.

    Reply
  8. Rob Long says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

    One of the most unethical things for safety is the way KPIs for safety incentivise and motivate dishonesty. None of this in the BoK on ethics but a major problem for the sector.

    Reply
  9. Matthew Thorne says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

    Let us not even mention the International Labour Organisation’s Triple Zero Campaign. “The Vision Zero Fund (VZF) brings together governments, employers’ and workers’ organizations, companies, and other stakeholders to jointly advance towards the vision of achieving zero severe and fatal work-related accidents, injuries and diseases in global supply chains.”

    https://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/how-the-ilo-works/departments-and-offices/governance/labadmin-osh/programmes/vzf/lang–en/index.htm

    Reply
  10. bernardcorden says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

    The current toll for mine dust lung diseases across Queensland exceeds 130 victims and the AIHS/SIA failed to provide any submissions to the Queensland parliamentary inquiry into black lung or provide any official representation at the numerous public hearings.

    This was raised with the AIHS/SIA on several occasions and the reason proffered was a lack of technical expertise yet somewhat paradoxically it operated a remunerative scheme covering certification of OHS professionals.

    Reply
  11. Pam Pryor says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

    I have always said – do something and you leave yourself open to criticism (but the discussion is often worthwhile); do nothing and there is a vacuum. Thanks to all for contributing to the discussion which was initiated and provoked by the OHS BoK chapter on Ethics and Professional Practice. We are obviously achieving our aim of raising the awareness and discussion around ethics on OHS practice.

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 13, 2020 at 6:38 PM

      Pam, as long as people learn from the validity of the constructive criticism then a ‘good’ has emerged.

      Reply
  12. Rob long says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

    January 2020 on myosh and AIHS site
    https://myosh.com/blog/tag/zero-harm/

    Hmm, definitely out of date.

    Reply
    • Admin says

      February 13, 2020 at 6:38 PM

      There was an ad in the employment section of the AIHS website, just a few months ago, for a “Zero Harm Manager”

      Reply
      • Rob Long says

        February 13, 2020 at 8:43 PM

        I love how ‘ethics is the soul of professionalism’ p1. Of the BoK on ethics but is in no curriculum in WHS and got no mention in the Boland curriculum review. Dies that mean Safety has no soul?

        Reply
  13. Rob Long says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

    Coming up next week 26 February 2020 a webinar courtesy of the AIHS on zero: https://www.aihs.org.au/events/building-mindful-high-performance-safety-culture
    https://myosh.com/blog/2020/01/21/why-zero-harm-is-not-a-reality/amp/
    All about a lack of belief in zero, how zero could be a reality, just needs right belief. Ahh, more religion in the cult of zero, but sorry talking about zero is ‘baying at the moon’ and behind the times? Indeed!

    Reply
    • Admin says

      February 13, 2020 at 6:38 PM

      They still think that the only negativity toward zero is that it is unachievable – they don’t seem to understand the harm being caused by the methods that are being used to try and achieve it

      Reply
      • Rob Long says

        February 13, 2020 at 6:43 PM

        Neither do they understand it as a symbol or ideology, even though they confess it as so. No comprehension at all of the nature of human unconscious or how symbols work, no idea about the nature of belief even though they talk all the time about belief in zero as the case with this latest AIHS webinar. No understanding at all of binary entrapment and binary opposition, nor that their worldview is locked into behaviourism, cognitivism and materialism. No idea that there are disciplines and worldviews outside of their own that have nothing to do with ‘opinion’ or simply wanting to be contrary. Without such understanding the only recourse is to politicize critiicism, reject learning, close dialogue and put your head in the sand, a perfect approach to non-learning fostered by zero!

        Reply
  14. bernardcorden says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

    The following link entitled “Improving safety in the mining and quarrying sector” is from the Queensland Government DNRME website, which was last updated on 06/02/2020:

    https://www.dnrme.qld.gov.au/mining-resources/initiatives/safety-reset

    It includes a zero serious harm initiative.

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

      2019
      https://www.ehstoday.com/safety-leadership/article/21920265/slc-2019-qa-zero-harm-culture-its-a-journey

      Hmmmm, obviously old news.

      Reply
  15. Matthew Thorne says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:29 PM

    Of all the people in charge of producing this “Book of Knowledge” , only one of them claims to have experience in Ethics. And this person works in the School of Accounting. Peer review from a School of Law. This must surely colour how people write about a subject.

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

      Matthew, this amateurish production speaks volumes about the industry and its culture. There will be no change till it drops zero.

      Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

      Hence the map of worldviews. Of course, Safety thinks there is only one!

      Reply
  16. David Clarke says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:29 PM

    Firstly, a public congratulations to the many highly professional contributors to this BOK chapter, which draws very widely on on the issue of ethics from sources around the world, and references an extensive range of reading from very highly regarded writers on ethics. This is an important body of work for health and safety people, because its existence means that there will be many more reflections and discussions about ethics and its role in practice. Secondly, you’re getting way behind-the-times on ‘zero’. Your pet hate has virtually gone away, and you’re baying at the moon. ‘..the industry’ (I assume you mean the profession) is quite diverse, and I suggest that in that diversity it resists trite one-liners. It has now literally been years since there has been widespread usage of the old marketing term ‘zero harm’ in Australia (which is an excellent way to impart in a broad context, the basic idea that no amount of harm is ok) and it was never really the MOST common approach anyway. The profession broadly understands that a marketing term does not necessarily make a health and safety program. But back to the issue! – The conversations about ethics begin. Of that, I am very happy. I suppose in observing those discussions, I will have to live with reading the self-aggrandizing crap well as the good stuff.

    Reply
    • Rob long says

      February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

      David, Happy to provide a detailed critique at any time. Happy to debate the BoK on ethics at any time. Happy to demonstrate the depth of the zero ideology across the safety sector globally at any time.

      The BoK itself does the best condemnation of the sector regarding ethics, with no vision for its inclusion in the curriculum or development of ethical competence for the industry. A shame it was never honest about its bias or intentions.

      Reply
    • Barry Spud says

      February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

      https://www.bmd.com.au/the-bmd-way/zero-harm/

      https://www.miningreview.com/news/zero-harm-mining-industry/

      https://www.downergroup.com/achieving-zero-harm-through-active-leadership

      https://www.bhp.com/investor-centre/sustainability-report-2018/

      https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/book/south-australia-zero-harm-project

      Reply
      • Rob Long says

        February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

        The Queensland regulator has been locked into zero harm for 20 years as was highlighted by the Brady Review. Hardly some by-line or behind the news concept. The AIHS are still signed up to it and hope that the elephant in the room would shrink. It isn’t, if anything it continues to dominate the global safety sector.

        Reply
  17. Rob Long says

    February 9, 2020 at 11:14 AM

    One of the most unethical things for safety is the way KPIs for safety incentivise and motivate dishonesty. None of this in the BoK on ethics but a major problem for the sector.

    Reply
  18. bernardcorden says

    February 9, 2020 at 8:51 AM

    The current toll for mine dust lung diseases across Queensland exceeds 130 victims and the AIHS/SIA failed to provide any submissions to the Queensland parliamentary inquiry into black lung or provide any official representation at the numerous public hearings.

    This was raised with the AIHS/SIA on several occasions and the reason proffered was a lack of technical expertise yet somewhat paradoxically it operated a remunerative scheme covering certification of OHS professionals.

    Reply
  19. Pam Pryor says

    February 9, 2020 at 7:55 AM

    I have always said – do something and you leave yourself open to criticism (but the discussion is often worthwhile); do nothing and there is a vacuum. Thanks to all for contributing to the discussion which was initiated and provoked by the OHS BoK chapter on Ethics and Professional Practice. We are obviously achieving our aim of raising the awareness and discussion around ethics on OHS practice.

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 9, 2020 at 8:10 AM

      Pam, as long as people learn from the validity of the constructive criticism then a ‘good’ has emerged.

      Reply
  20. Rob Long says

    February 9, 2020 at 6:29 AM

    Coming up next week 26 February 2020 a webinar courtesy of the AIHS on zero: https://www.aihs.org.au/events/building-mindful-high-performance-safety-culture
    https://myosh.com/blog/2020/01/21/why-zero-harm-is-not-a-reality/amp/
    All about a lack of belief in zero, how zero could be a reality, just needs right belief. Ahh, more religion in the cult of zero, but sorry talking about zero is ‘baying at the moon’ and behind the times? Indeed!

    Reply
    • Admin says

      February 9, 2020 at 7:11 AM

      They still think that the only negativity toward zero is that it is unachievable – they don’t seem to understand the harm being caused by the methods that are being used to try and achieve it

      Reply
      • Rob Long says

        February 9, 2020 at 7:45 AM

        Neither do they understand it as a symbol or ideology, even though they confess it as so. No comprehension at all of the nature of human unconscious or how symbols work, no idea about the nature of belief even though they talk all the time about belief in zero as the case with this latest AIHS webinar. No understanding at all of binary entrapment and binary opposition, nor that their worldview is locked into behaviourism, cognitivism and materialism. No idea that there are disciplines and worldviews outside of their own that have nothing to do with ‘opinion’ or simply wanting to be contrary. Without such understanding the only recourse is to politicize critiicism, reject learning, close dialogue and put your head in the sand, a perfect approach to non-learning fostered by zero!

        Reply
  21. bernardcorden says

    February 8, 2020 at 9:28 PM

    But wait there’s more, straight from the AIHS website (22/08/2018)..…….

    At the conclusion of the event, the International Security Association will launch its VisionZero campaign in Australia. This is the first global campaign to improve safety, health and wellbeing at work; acknowledges that no-one from any nation should lose their life at work.

    https://www.aihs.org.au/events/safety-governance-how-informed-your-board-about-managing-damage

    Reply
  22. bernardcorden says

    February 8, 2020 at 8:08 PM

    Scotty from marketing here:

    http://visionzero.global/events-and-trainings

    Reply
  23. Matthew Thorne says

    February 8, 2020 at 7:54 PM

    Let us not even mention the International Labour Organisation’s Triple Zero Campaign. “The Vision Zero Fund (VZF) brings together governments, employers’ and workers’ organizations, companies, and other stakeholders to jointly advance towards the vision of achieving zero severe and fatal work-related accidents, injuries and diseases in global supply chains.”

    https://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/how-the-ilo-works/departments-and-offices/governance/labadmin-osh/programmes/vzf/lang–en/index.htm

    Reply
  24. Rob long says

    February 8, 2020 at 7:33 PM

    January 2020 on myosh and AIHS site
    https://myosh.com/blog/tag/zero-harm/

    Hmm, definitely out of date.

    Reply
    • Admin says

      February 8, 2020 at 7:41 PM

      There was an ad in the employment section of the AIHS website, just a few months ago, for a “Zero Harm Manager”

      Reply
      • Rob Long says

        February 8, 2020 at 7:58 PM

        I love how ‘ethics is the soul of professionalism’ p1. Of the BoK on ethics but is in no curriculum in WHS and got no mention in the Boland curriculum review. Dies that mean Safety has no soul?

        Reply
  25. Rob long says

    February 8, 2020 at 7:17 PM

    2020 March.
    https://www.safetyinaction.com/event/b65e0c62-6fba-4235-819a-4b7c7c249fbb/summary

    Safety in action conference for a zero incident future. Hmmm, must be old news.

    So many examples of zero trending across the world and Australia it’s overwhelming.

    Reply
  26. bernardcorden says

    February 8, 2020 at 6:31 PM

    The following link entitled “Improving safety in the mining and quarrying sector” is from the Queensland Government DNRME website, which was last updated on 06/02/2020:

    https://www.dnrme.qld.gov.au/mining-resources/initiatives/safety-reset

    It includes a zero serious harm initiative.

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 8, 2020 at 7:10 PM

      2019
      https://www.ehstoday.com/safety-leadership/article/21920265/slc-2019-qa-zero-harm-culture-its-a-journey

      Hmmmm, obviously old news.

      Reply
  27. David Clarke says

    February 8, 2020 at 5:32 PM

    Firstly, a public congratulations to the many highly professional contributors to this BOK chapter, which draws very widely on on the issue of ethics from sources around the world, and references an extensive range of reading from very highly regarded writers on ethics. This is an important body of work for health and safety people, because its existence means that there will be many more reflections and discussions about ethics and its role in practice. Secondly, you’re getting way behind-the-times on ‘zero’. Your pet hate has virtually gone away, and you’re baying at the moon. ‘..the industry’ (I assume you mean the profession) is quite diverse, and I suggest that in that diversity it resists trite one-liners. It has now literally been years since there has been widespread usage of the old marketing term ‘zero harm’ in Australia (which is an excellent way to impart in a broad context, the basic idea that no amount of harm is ok) and it was never really the MOST common approach anyway. The profession broadly understands that a marketing term does not necessarily make a health and safety program. But back to the issue! – The conversations about ethics begin. Of that, I am very happy. I suppose in observing those discussions, I will have to live with reading the self-aggrandizing crap well as the good stuff.

    Reply
    • Barry Spud says

      February 8, 2020 at 6:33 PM

      https://www.bmd.com.au/the-bmd-way/zero-harm/

      https://www.miningreview.com/news/zero-harm-mining-industry/

      https://www.downergroup.com/achieving-zero-harm-through-active-leadership

      https://www.bhp.com/investor-centre/sustainability-report-2018/

      https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/book/south-australia-zero-harm-project

      Reply
      • Rob Long says

        February 8, 2020 at 6:57 PM

        The Queensland regulator has been locked into zero harm for 20 years as was highlighted by the Brady Review. Hardly some by-line or behind the news concept. The AIHS are still signed up to it and hope that the elephant in the room would shrink. It isn’t, if anything it continues to dominate the global safety sector.

        Reply
    • Rob long says

      February 8, 2020 at 6:54 PM

      David, Happy to provide a detailed critique at any time. Happy to debate the BoK on ethics at any time. Happy to demonstrate the depth of the zero ideology across the safety sector globally at any time.

      The BoK itself does the best condemnation of the sector regarding ethics, with no vision for its inclusion in the curriculum or development of ethical competence for the industry. A shame it was never honest about its bias or intentions.

      Reply
  28. Matthew Thorne says

    February 8, 2020 at 2:29 PM

    Of all the people in charge of producing this “Book of Knowledge” , only one of them claims to have experience in Ethics. And this person works in the School of Accounting. Peer review from a School of Law. This must surely colour how people write about a subject.

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 8, 2020 at 3:07 PM

      Matthew, this amateurish production speaks volumes about the industry and its culture. There will be no change till it drops zero.

      Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 9, 2020 at 2:17 PM

      Hence the map of worldviews. Of course, Safety thinks there is only one!

      Reply

Leave a Reply to Rob Long Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Search and Discover More on this Site

Visit Count – Started Jan 2015

  • 24,008,006 Visitors

Never miss a post - Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address and join other discerning risk and safety people who receive notifications of new posts by email

Join 7,420 other subscribers

NEW! Free Download

How we pay for the high cost of running of this site – try it for free on your site

Please take our 2 minute zero survey

Recent Comments

  • Roel on Free Workplace Health and Safety Downloads
  • Rob Long on Safety Silences – Video Series
  • BRENT R CHARLTON on Safety Silences – Video Series
  • Rob Long on Sleep Dysfunction, Dreaming and Safety
  • Rob Long on Working Out What Makes Sense in Safety
  • simon cassin on Working Out What Makes Sense in Safety
  • Rob Long on The Safety Trifecta and Nothing Changes
  • Aneta Parker on The Safety Trifecta and Nothing Changes
  • Rob Long on How to Tackle Risk You Can’t See
  • Andrew Thornhill on How to Tackle Risk You Can’t See

FREE eBOOK DOWNLOADS

Featured Downloads

  • Accident-Incident-Investigation-eBook-Rev1.pdf (9065 downloads)
  • covid–19: Identifying the symptoms (6677 downloads)
  • Learning-How-to-Facilitate-Learning.docx (3125 downloads)
  • Tunneling Risk Assessment (1458 downloads)
  • Psychosocial risk assessment tool (114 downloads)
  • National Psychological safety guidance material (191 downloads)
  • Volunteer-Risk-Assessment-checklist.pdf (2065 downloads)
  • Safe Work Method Statement NSW - Word doc (7040 downloads)
  • Active Living at Work (15931 downloads)
  • Safety-Backronym-Poster.pdf (1381 downloads)
  • Risk-and-Safety-Schools-of-Thought.docx (2482 downloads)
  • HOTEL-RESORT-RISK-CHECKLIST.doc (11026 downloads)
  • template_training_needs.xls (4544 downloads)
  • Safety_Training_Needs_Analysis6.doc (7290 downloads)
  • Supervisor-Induction-Checklist.docx (1006 downloads)

Recent Posts

  • Culture Silences in Safety Symbolism
  • Culture Silences in Safety Mythology
  • The Safety Trifecta and Nothing Changes
  • Sleep Dysfunction, Dreaming and Safety
  • Working Out What Makes Sense in Safety
  • How to Tackle Risk You Can’t See
  • Study Reveals an Unexpected Side Effect of Traffic Safety Messages
  • Human Factors is Never About Humans
  • Where to Start in Humanising Leadership in Risk
  • Humanising Leadership in Risk, Shifting the Focus from Objects to Persons

What is Psychological Safety at Work?

Footer

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address and join other discerning risk and safety people who receive notifications of new posts by email

Join 7,420 other subscribers

AUTHORS

  • Alan Quilley
    • Heinrich–Industrial Accident Prevention
    • The Problem With ZERO Goals and Results
  • Bernard Corden
    • After the goldrush
    • The Internationale
  • Bill Sims
    • Employee Engagement: Chocolate, Vanilla, or Strawberry?
    • Injury Hiding-How do you stop it?
  • Craig Clancy
    • Task Based vs Activity Based Safe Work Method Statements
    • Safety And Tender Submissions
  • Daniel Kirk
    • It’s easy being wise after the event.
    • A Positive Safety Story
  • Dave Whitefield
    • Safety is about…
    • Safety and Compliance
  • Dennis Millard
    • Are You Risk Intelligent?
    • Honey they get me! They get me at work!
  • Drewie
    • Downturn Doin’ Your Head In? Let’s Chat….
    • How was your break?
  • Gabrielle Carlton
    • All Care and No Care!
    • You Are Not Alone!
  • George Robotham
    • How to Give an Unforgettable Safety Presentation
    • How To Write a Safety Report
  • Goran Prvulovic
    • Safety Manager – an Ultimate Scapegoat
    • HSE Performance – Back to Basics
  • James Ellis
    • Psychological Core Stability for Wellbeing in Workers Comp
    • In search of plan B in workers’ recovery
  • James Parkinson
    • To laugh or not to laugh
    • People and Safety
  • John Toomey
    • In it for The Long Haul – Making the most of the FIFO Lifestyle
    • Who is Responsible for This?
  • Karl Cameron
    • Abby Normal Safety
    • The Right Thing
  • Ken Roberts
    • Safety Legislation Is Our Biggest Accident?
    • HSE Trip Down Memory Lane
  • Mark Perrett
    • Psychology of Persuasion: Top 5 influencing skills for getting what you want
  • Mark Taylor
    • Build a Psychologically Safe Workplace by Taking Risks and Analysing Failures
    • Enculturing Safety
  • Max Geyer
    • WHS Legislation is NOT about Safety it’s about Culture
    • Due Diligence Is Not Just Ticking Boxes!
  • Matt Thorne
    • Safety Culture–Hudson’s Model
    • Culture – Edgar Schein
  • Peter Ribbe
    • Is there “Common Sense” in safety?
    • Who wants to be a safety professional?
  • Phil LaDuke
    • Professional Conferences Are A Sleazy Con
    • Hey Idiots, You’re Worried About the Wrong Things
  • Admin
    • Study Reveals an Unexpected Side Effect of Traffic Safety Messages
    • Humanising Leadership in Risk, Shifting the Focus from Objects to Persons
  • Dr Rob Long
    • Culture Silences in Safety Symbolism
    • Culture Silences in Safety Mythology
  • Rob Sams
    • The Learning (and unlearning) that Revealed my Vocation
    • I’m just not that into safety anymore
  • Barry Spud
    • Things To Consider When Developing And Designing Your Company SWMS
    • Bad Safety Photos
  • Sheri Suckling
    • How Can I Get the Boss to Listen?
  • Simon Cassin
    • Safety values, ideas, behaviours and clothes
  • Safety Nerd
    • The Block isn’t portraying safety as it should be
    • Toolbox Talk Show–PPE
  • Wynand Serfontein
    • Why The Problem With Learning Is Unlearning
    • I DON’T KNOW
  • Zoe Koskinas
    • Why is fallibility so challenging in the workplace?

Most commented on

Forecasting Safety

The Banned Objects Index – A New Development in Safety Culture

The Unconscious and the Soap Dispenser

Dumbs for Safety

The Real Barriers to Safety

Safety as Faith Healing

Who Said We Don’t Need Systems?

Why Safety Controls Don’t Always Work

How to use signs, symbols and text effectively in communicating about risk

Safety Should NOT Be About Safety

FEATURED POSTS

Defining Safety

The Hero Myth in Modern Management

What Does SPoR Do?

Embracing Diversity & Critical Thinking to Help us ‘Create’?

Understanding The Social Psychology of Risk – Prof Karl E. Weick

History and Hindsight in Safety

The Acts of God and Act of Humans

The Lexicon of Safety Gibberish

It’s Always About Paperwork

The Mystery and Paradox of Being an Individual in a Social World

Starting Points, Worldviews and Risk

The Psychology of Leadership in Risk

Data Cannot Drive Vision

Organising to Manage Uncertainty in an Unpredictable World

Risk and Safety as a Wicked Problem

Emotions, Bias and Heuristics in Risk

When Art Speaks to Harm

The Mystery of the Emotions

Safety Isn’t Sexy, and it Shouldn’t Be!

How Do Workers Make Decisions?

More Posts from this Category

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address and join other discerning risk and safety people who receive notifications of new posts by email

Join 7,420 other subscribers

How we pay for the high cost of running of this site – try it for free on your site

 

How To Make Your Own Hand Sanitizer

 

 

How to Make your own Covid-19 Face Mask

 

Covid-19 Returning To Work Safety, Transitioning, Start Up And Re Entry Plans

 

How’s the Hot Desking Going Covid?

imageOne of the benefits of the Covid-19 epidemic is a total rethink about how we live and work (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-28/coronavirus-could-reshape-how-australians-work-forever/12097124 ).

Expertise by Regurgitation and Re-Badging

One of the fascinating things about the Coronavirus pandemic is watching Safety morph into epidemiology expertise. I would like a dollar for every flyer, presentation, podcast, powerpoint, checklist template, toolbox talk and poster set that had jumped into my inbox… Read the rest

The Stress of Stasis

One of the challenging things about the Coronavirus crisis is stasis. For those without work and confined to home, for those in self-isolation, it’s like life is frozen in time. ‘Stay at home’ is the mantra. The trouble is, in… Read the rest

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.