A DIFFERENT APPROACH TO DEFINING “SAFE”

As a Safety Professional, I have been asked numerous times – is something safe??Or, they may ask is the company/organization/facility safe??The question is asking for an absolute – is it “Safe” or not. People don’t realize that while they are trying to ask about a certain condition, instead they are asking about a state of being.

?There are words in the English language that do not have a universal all in one definition, such as Love, Godly, Happiness, Cool, Smelly, Sweet and Safe.?These are comparative terms - a comparison or a relation between two or more things in terms of quality, quantity, or degree.?Being relative to a comparison, they connote a state of being – being in love, being happy, being smelly, etc.?And since the terms depend on a state of being, then it becomes relative to some perspective or standard.

?For example, take the term “Hard”.?If you and a partner have ever been mattress shopping, you can relate to the relative nature of the terms Hard or Soft.?My defining a certain mattress as “Hard” was too “Soft” for my partner.?While some people would call Camembert a stinky cheese, there would be others who would argue that a Limburger or a Vieux Boulogne cheese is stinky.

?So, using a comparative term requires you to define the parameters or context of which you are asking.

?For example, it is not a simple matter to ask if a Pepper is “Hot”.?There are Cayenne Pepper lovers and they use a good quantity of it.?Yet others think a Jalapeno pepper is too “Hot” and use it sparingly.?Since tastes and opinions vary, and the term “Hot” is a comparative, we need some reference or parameters to sort it all out.?If you want to know if a certain Pepper was “Hot” you would refer to its placement on the Scoville scale.

?So, we come to the term “Safe” and answering the question – is something Safe??

?We can look up the definition and find these, among the many derivations, that are provided:

• The state of freedom from harm, danger or injury.
• The condition or feeling of being safe, secure, having certainty
• The condition of being safe from undergoing or causing hurt, injury, or loss
• A concept that includes all measures and practices taken to preserve the life, health, and bodily integrity of individuals.
• The condition of being protected from or unlikely to cause danger, risk, or injury: they should leave for their own safety, the survivors were airlifted to safety
• Denoting something designed to prevent injury or damage: a safety barrier a safety helmet

?These are problematic, not only because they use the term safety in the definition itself, but allude to a “condition” or “concept” that itself is not defined or use another ambiguous term (certainty?, secure?, bodily integrity?).

?It is important to realize that safety is relative. When something is called “Safe”, this usually means that it is within certain reasonable limits and parameters. For example, a medication may be safe, for most people, under most circumstances, if taken in a certain amount.

So, when we are using the term “Safe” (and by relation “Unsafe”) we trying to determine if we are at Risk of something we do not want.?Risk is the probability that a Consequence occurs (harm, injury, damage or unacceptable outcome).

We cannot have zero risk. As long as we are exposed to a Hazard (an uncontrolled substance, energy or situation) there is a Risk for a Consequence (harm, injury, damage or unacceptable outcome).

So, if cannot have zero Risk, then we can only reduce our exposure to that Risk – the probability of a Consequence to as low as practicable.

A definition of “Safe” or “Safety” that removes ambiguity and addresses the comparative nature of the term would lead us to the following:

1.????All Hazards are known / identified.

2.????All Risks are managed – there are no unmanage risks.

3.????Risks are managed as low as practicable.

And

4.????You know it.

Let’s apply this to a question of is something “Safe”. By now, in reading this discussion, you can anticipate that asking if a certain automobile is “Safe” is an ambiguous question.?Let’s focus on stopping the car – probably most important if you want to avoid a dangerous collision.?There is no argument that a car with brakes would be “Safe” in comparison to a car without brakes. For instance, the brakes on a vehicle called the Allard Model are mechanical brakes (single circuit, pads/drums, lever actuated) and they can get the car to stop.?

Another car, the Delta 8, could be outfitted with power brakes (hydraulic, expanding internal shoe, dual circuit, with a Master Booster/Cylinder).?This has a greater degree of reliability and integrity of stopping power.?This Delta 8 model would be considered “Safe” as well and cause us to think of the previous car (Allard Model, with mechanical brakes) as not being “Safe”.

Another car, the Gemini, uses anti-lock, disc brakes with 2 piston calipers for its braking system.?Obviously, another improvement and more stopping power.?So, the Gemini is “Safe”.?But the other cars (Allard Model and Delta 8) do not seem as “Safe” with their seemingly lesser braking systems – even though those braking systems will stop the car.

Going further with another car, the Zima, uses carbon-fiber discs, ventilated, anti-lock, 6 piston brake system.?Again, further improvement and more stopping power.?So, the Zima is “Safe”.?But so were the other cars, Allard Model, Delta 8 and Gemini considered “Safe”.

We cannot have zero risk. As long as we are exposed to a Hazard (collision) there is a Risk for a Consequence (damage and injury from collision).?So, if cannot have zero Risk, then we can only reduce our exposure to that Risk – probability of the Consequence to as low as practicable.

Using the Safe definition developed before:

[] The Hazards: Moving car, tires, road conditions, other obstacles.

[] The Risks: Ability to stop and avoid collision.?Consequence is the potential for damage and injury from the collision.

[] Risks managed as low as practicable:

• Single circuit brake system – a failure leads to no brakes.?Whereas, Dual circuit brake system – a failure in one part still allows braking with the other.
• Disc systems can grab and hold wheels in cold wet conditions better than pad/drum systems.?2 to 4 piston caliper systems good for most travelers.?6 piston system only practicable for racing.
• Regular steel disc brakes have ample stopping power. Ventilated, carbon fiber disc brakes provide only a nominal amount of extra stopping power disproportionate to the cost of install on a vehicle that will not use that much stopping power.

[] And you know it: The brakes are regularly inspected and tested.?Records document the preventative maintenance.?Tires are in good condition.

Notice that all the cars have a braking system that can stop the car.?They just differ on the design and equipment used.?The differences involve a degree of performance that can be delivered – disc having more grabbing power than pad/drums, 6 piston calipers more powerful than 2 piston calipers.?When making a determination on what is “Safe”, the parameters of how you are using the vehicle determines what braking system is needed for you to consider the vehicle to be “Safe”.?For basic general vehicle use, commuting to work, running errands, grocery shopping, transporting kids to soccer practice, a vehicle with power brakes, dual system, anti-lock, disc brakes with 2 piston calipers are “Safe” to drive around and manage the Risks (ability to stop to avoid collision and avoid potential for damage and injury).?Carbon-fiber discs, ventilated, 6 piston brake system, while a real stopper, affords no real larger benefit - in other words, the extreme extra costs of that high end braking system is grossly disproportionate to the nominal amount of risk reduction realized.?Basically, the power brakes, dual system, anti-lock, disc brakes with 2 piston calipers brake system is Fit-For-Purpose. ?But then, if the parameters around the use of the vehicle is different – say it is used in racing – then carbon-fiber discs, ventilated, 6 piston brake system become the standard for “Safe” (or Fit-For-Purpose).

So, how to answer the question, is something “Safe” or is an organization “Safe”??Answer in relation to set of parameters or a standard – a state of being.?If cannot have zero Risk, then have all the Risks been managed to as low as practicable for the Purpose of that something or organization or operation?