Following the Rules 100% of the Time

OSHA regulations. DOD protocols. Site-specific requirements. Company policies.

So many times we get wrapped up in the 'It's against the rules' concept that we forget to look at why the rule was broken. Is it an arbitrary rule that doesn't fit the task at hand? Is it a blanket rule that fits 85% of the situations, but not this one? Is it a long standing company policy that no longer applies but no one has questioned it, or come up with a better solution? Is it possible that you have rules just for the sake of having rules?

Is there a time when it is justifiable to bend, or even break, a safety rule/regulation/policy? Is there a time where following the rule will actually create more of a hazard? Is there a time where the solution is too cost prohibitive to justify the implementation of the rule?

"In an ideal world, workers would always follow the safety rules." I have meditated on this quite regularly. With that being said let's explore that concept, in a realistic world.

1- The Safety rules signage says 'only authorized employees are to enter' an air conditioned building that is in the middle of the coal field. A crew of laborers, that were dropped off by their supervisor, are working outside of the building when one collapses from the heat. The only cool place around is the building. They have called for EMS from a personal cellphone and are waiting for them to arrive.

Do you require them to leave him laying in the direct sun or do you instruct them to bring him into the cool room?

Do you reprimand them for using a personal phone during work hours?

2A- The Policy says no 'Job-made tools'. The crew unloading carbon pellet bags into a conveyor are using a crane to lift the bags and a folding retractable blade knife to cut the bottom of the bag. The person cutting the bags gets covered in carbon dust with every new bag and the dust clogs the respirator each time. You have discovered during a walk through, that the cutter has opened and locked his knife halfway and then taped the handle of the knife to an eight foot piece of conduit. This has eliminated him standing close to the suspended load, placing his hand under the load to cut the bag, the carbon dust covering him as he cuts it, and the carbon dust from coating and clogging the respirator.

2B- A Pipefitter and welder are having a problem getting a pipe to properly align to make the weld. The pipefitter goes through his toolbox and finds a set of 'No Dogs' he had previously made. They use the No Dogs to align the pipe and get the weld made.

Do you reprimand either for the use of a job-made tool?

Do you halt the operation until a manufactured tool of that design can be purchased and shipped?

Do you penalize the first example (2B) due to management's decision to perform the work without a proper risk assessment and correction beforehand?

3- "Site Specific training states 'Only clear glasses are allowed inside any building, at any time'. The crew is working in a clear walled storage building. An employee (Cleared by the company MRO), who has recently had eye surgery starts developing pain in the recovering eye. The bright lights in the building and the sun coming through the windows and doors are causing him issues. He states he needs to go to the Medical/Safety office. As his supervisor assists him to walk to the office, he removes his clear glasses and places dark glasses on. and further shields his eyes from the light.

Do you reprimand him for the dark glasses in the building?