Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In this article, I consider at length the ideology of accident proneness, which is most fundamentally based upon the claim that the majority of industrial acci dents are caused through operator error. Once the concept has been defined and its origins noted, the main body of the paper is devoted to outlining its practical effects, as the consequences of its predominance in terms of attitudes and practices concerning health and safety for employers and workers are con sidered. It is shown how this ideology is used variously, loosely, but function ally ; in particular, its predominance prevents serious consideration of meas ures which might have lasting effects in terms of improved accident prevention. Finally, the practical means and consequences of its transcendence in the man agement of safety and health in the chemical industry are considered.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Steve Tombs (1991) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: