Shortcuts and Tradition Can Hamper Safety

Shortcut or Cost Cut?

My first example was ironically provided by the pizza joint we frequent. A contractor was replacing the outside deck and had dug a dangerous excavation too close to the building and too deep for workers to enter, although they had. When I picked up my order, I first snapped the photo below. It was about 2 feet deeper than allowed, "stepped" not sloped as needed, and was already failing. I found the manager and asked that he tell the contractor that someone was going to get killed if they continued to work in that trench. He acknowledged it was not a great excavation, shook his head, and said, "Hopefully, it will be done quickly."

If someone were to have died in this trench, the pizza principle would have played a part: The soil was left unmanageable. There was too much. Several contributors would have played a part in creating this killing condition.

• Though deep, a "mini" excavator was used for the work. That machine could not move the dirt far enough away from the hole. It was too small a machine, but it was cheaper to rent. So, the excavator took a chance.
• It was more than likely the excavator operator had done similar trenches without incident.
• He probably bid on the work against other contractors who would have used the correct machine. But his bid was lower because he was not going to slice his pizza.

Tribal Knowledge or Let Men Be Men?

Some of the most arduous tasks on a construction site are done because "that's what the way we have always done it." A classic example was shown on a Dirty Jobs episode where host Mike Rowe joined a group of rod busters. These workers place rebar (long steel rods) in a crisscross fashion before pouring concrete. The steel rods tie together a concrete slab to keep it from flexing too much or cracking.

To secure these steel rods requires the tying of each intersection where rebar crosses with wire by hand. He noted this work is typically "out of sight and, therefore, out of mind," so the world doesn't see how hard the work is. It's backbreaking work. When a worker was asked about how hard it was to bend down and tie each piece he answered, "You have to embrace the suck…." The workers just take the beating.

As the show ends, the superintendent brings out a tool to try out. The super proudly announced, "This is new technology," and showed Mike a battery-powered tool that did the knot by just pulling a trigger. "That's what we use with our new guys." Mike then asked the obvious question, "But why doesn't everybody up here have one?" The super answered, "We use them sparingly for ultimately you have to learn how to tie." Whether letting men be men or following the way things have always been done, a preventable disaster can be the result.

Artificial Intelligence (AI)

My wife fears the idea of artificial intelligence (AI). She is a writer, and AI will dilute if not kill that industry. Agreed. But I can see its value for construction safety. I have seen it used and understand the value because it thinks like we should.

I recently suggested to a risk manager to feed the AI genie locked in their corporate closet with all of the loss information and details on injuries and fatalities for the history of the company, and then have the genie reference this data against the costs for any claims or lawsuits. The goal would be for the AI brain to describe the setting most commonly associated with their top 10 losses. The outcome would be based on severity and the cost to a firm. The project management could then focus on those areas to ensure those work conditions never exist. He answered, "That's a great idea! We have all that data!" But it has yet to be used.

Using AI will also provide some honest feedback on what we see and ignore, such as determining what work body positions will cost the company most in losses. I suspect it's settings like the woman in the picture below ruining her back as she assembles these components in one of a hundred bathrooms. The only light was from my flashlight. AI will capture such tasks for the poor body positioning and quote the cost of the claim that the worker will eventually file. The solution is that assembly should be done off-site on a bench.

AI will also be looking at worksites and searching for other claims in the making. Here are just a few examples that I have collected of work that damages young knees and good people.

Trying the idea of searching for poor body position is not new. Below is an example of how that ergonomic risk is captured. (Thanks to Catamount Consulting for sharing.) The scan below confirms someone is being damaged and where, so the task can be changed or eliminated to avoid the inevitable injury and claim.

Keeping the Guys Working (Yes, Overall, They Are Guys)

One of our barriers to making the work manageable is not ending the backbreaking work we accept. And men being men, it's primal to show off how strong we are, how many push-ups that we can do, and that I can still split wood like I am 20 years old, which is the reason why I ended up in the emergency room.

I once visited a site where a mess was being made … on purpose. In New York City, contracts often have a clause called "center piling." This requires all the trades to place their trash, scrap, or debris in a pile in the center of a space. Rather than put a piece of Sheetrock directly in a bin for easy removal, this planned clutter provides work for the laborers. The work could be easier if the trades policed their trash, but that would cost some people their jobs. This is an unspoken but common barrier to progress in construction.

Here's another example: You may be able to install more modular electrical receptacles if they are prewired off-site, but the trades would rather fabricate them in the field since that's the way it is typically done. See an example below from last year. These elevator panel connections being fabricated for each floor could have been purchased or assembled in a shop, then installed. I asked them for permission before I took their picture. Perhaps they too recognize the inefficiency?

The idea of material management and our comfort with hard, tedious work is not new but something we must spend more time exploring. I envision contractors and trade organizations will take the data they have and ask AI what the fastest and safest way to do the work is. However, we will need to trust the data the AI genie provides, which will not always be comfortable. An example is that for decades contractors have used the Occupational Safety and Health Administration incident rates to determine how safe their firm is compared to others. That method of measurement was debunked in 2020. ¹ Yet, jobs are still awarded and bonuses set based on those numbers because we have always done it that way.