I went to some mandatory OSHA training not too long ago. They kept rhyming, "I could've saved a life that day, but I chose to look the other way." By the time it was over, I was making up my own stupid poems.... I killed that stupid jerk that day. He was a nasty brute, He had to pay!
But that wasn't the stupid part. They showed two partners with a non-GFCI extension cord and an electric drill. The guy starts drilling on a column and gets a nasty shock. OK so far until thay go into flashback mode. His partner goes to the tool room and picks up the GFCI cord like a safety conscious trooper. But then he plugs his drill into the GFCI cord and drills the hole. I'm thinking I should've gone for popcorn. Either he should've drilled the hole the first time or tripped the GFCI in the flashback. And the guys who produced this video are the ones to teach me electrical safety???
After the video was over, I pointed out the folly of the segment to our instructor. He was a nice guy but by no means an electrical expert. He used an example of a frayed, 2 conductor clock cord, with both conductors frayed. He seemed to think a GFCI would protect him if he touched both. I told him not to demonstrate his theory, and why.
Finally, I attended some NFPA 72 training. The main speaker was very knowledgable on fire protection and alarms. For some reason, he made a statement about a 120V control transformer not really being able to hurt you. I took him aside during the lunch break to see if he had meant a 24 or 48 volt transformer. Nope, he meant a typical control transformer. I had to point out to him that he would be hard pressed to find a 120V control transformer that would be current limited enough not to kill him.
So the question is... How many times do you see training professionals, productions, or publications present material that is obviously wrong?
[This message has been edited by JoeTestingEngr (edited 12-10-2005).]
I really hate the condescending approach so many "safety" materials take. Their starting premise seems to be that everyone (except them,of course) has less sense than your average cartoon character. This is then followed by over-simplification, onver-generalisation, and technical errors.
Probably the most dangerous element of this stuff is the "here is the rule, that must be always followed, or you're an idiot, and we'll send you to the gulag" conclusion.
Why do I say "dangerous?" Because it is simply wrong. I say this using the example of wearing gloves. I've been in two related businesses, doing related tasks; one banned wearing gloves for protection, while the other required their wear for the entire shift. They can't both be right!
This approach is also dangerous for a less obvious reason. By focusing on "rules and procedures," and stifiling any intellegent discussion......they are effectively turning the clock back to 1930, and the higher accident rates of that time.
We have since learned that rules, procedures, and equipment are but a starting point. The greatest improvement in safety came about when it was recognised that such "intangibles" as an awake, aware mind and "corporate culture" had an enormous impact on safety.
I once saw a co-worker lose a thumb because of unfounded malicious gossip. The guy was confronted by this nonsense as he started his shift, was distracted, and promptly got hurt. What matters he is that the company in question was absolutely unwilling to consider the role in the accident played by the "game-player." Management instead preferred to keep a "divide and rule" atmosphere in place.
You seem to have a very good re-collection of this seminar. Thier time well spent, sweetheart!.
Well, not really, Honeybuns! All I really remember is a guy who only his dog could love, being eliminated and a GFCI magically repairing a defective electric drill. We did come up with some pretty funny verses for the poem though. I'm sure that I would remember more of what they had gotten right, if they hadn't gotten a few things glaringly wrong. There is enough expertise @ OSHA that they should be able to sweat the details. I think the main benefit was the discussion after the video where we shared the errors with those that didn't detect them and the reminder that a GFCI won't protect you between L & N. The video should stand on its own merit.
An example of what I think is a fantastic and sad video is "Funeral for a Friend". We watch it as part of recurrent Rail Safety Training. I remember most of the scenarios and lessons taught. I was even thinking of a design or two that might have saved a few of the lives that were lost. I think that that video is the most valuable part of the training. Joe
[This message has been edited by JoeTestingEngr (edited 12-11-2005).]