Read the article: https://incident-prevention.com/blog/confronting-data-bias-to-improve-safety-outcomes/

This podcast episode features Gina Vanderlin, CUSP, CSP, CHMM, CIT, Health and Safety Program Manager at PSEG Long Island and a self-professed "Safety Alchemist". In a deep dive with host Kate Wade, Gina explores how safety professionals can transform raw data and standard procedures into meaningful organizational change. The conversation focuses on her Applied Alchemy article series for Incident Prevention magazine, specifically highlighting the hidden dangers of data bias and the evolving safety risks associated with new energy technologies like lithium-ion batteries.

• The Concept of Safety Alchemy: Rather than just following compliance-based checklists, a "safety alchemist" blends diverse disciplines—such as behavioral science, decision science, and engineering—to transform information into actionable insight.
• The Evolution of Battery Hazards: As utilities integrate EVs and grid storage, employers must reconsider hazard communication. Batteries often bypass traditional scrutiny because they are classified as "articles," but damaged or failing batteries introduce significant chemical and fire risks.
• Data Bias in Safety Management: Bias is a natural human trait, but in safety data, it can lead to "ghost" weaknesses. Gina identifies five key biases—survivorship, selection, measurement, historical, and algorithmic—that can cause a safety system to drift away from reality.
• The "Geographic Presumption": Under a new OSHA letter of interpretation (Jan 2026), injuries caused by personal devices (like e-cigarettes or personal chargers) in the workplace are generally considered work-related and recordable.
• Improving Decision Quality: The common thread across all safety domains is decision quality. Improving how workers interpret information and how leaders prioritize resources is the most effective way to address the plateau in Serious Injury and Fatality (SIF) rates

Q1: How does Gina Vanderlin define "Decision Quality" in the context of utility safety?

A: Gina defines it as the core issue connecting diverse safety topics. It involves how individuals and organizations interpret information to make choices. If decisions are made based on flawed assumptions or biased data, the entire safety system can fail to address real-world risks.

Q2: What is a specific example of how data bias has physically impacted safety training?

A: Gina points to CPR training, noting that 95% of mannequins are anatomically male. This lack of representative data creates a "modesty deterrent" and technical discomfort, resulting in women being 14% less likely to receive CPR during a public medical event.

Q3: What does Gina suggest is the biggest pitfall for organizations rebranding their programs as "SIF-focused"?

A: The pitfall is rebranding on paper without actually improving the quality of investigations or examining the decision-making conditions that led to the exposure. Simply changing the name of a near-miss program doesn't change the safety outcome if the underlying system remains the same.

Subscribe to Incident Prevention Magazine - https://incident-prevention.com/subscribe-now/

Register for the iP Utility Safety Conference & Expo - https://utilitysafetyconference.com/

#UtilitySafety #SafetyAlchemy #DataBias #OccupationalHealth #IncidentPrevention #EHSLeadership

_______________________________

This podcast is sponsored by T&D Powerskills. If you are looking for a comprehensive lineworker training solution, visit tdpowerskills.com today and use the exclusive podcast listener promo code IP2026 to receive a 5% discount!

In this hard-hitting and deeply personal session, industry veteran Danny Raines, CUSP, challenges the "normalization of deviation" in the electrical utility industry. Drawing from decades of experience in the field, as well as his perspective as a pilot, Danny explores why skilled professionals continue to bypass safety regulations despite having better equipment and training than ever before.

Through a series of real-world case studies and sobering accident investigations, this program dissects the thin line between "operating by the rules" and true operational excellence. Danny reminds us that while we can work in an unacceptable manner for years without incident, we are simply increasing the odds of a catastrophic failure. It is a call to action for every employee to become their "brother’s keeper" and refuse to let the unacceptable become the standard.

In the first half, Danny discusses the origins of the "Accepting the Unacceptable" program and the alarming statistics of human error.

• The Risk of "It Ain't My Job": How a lack of ownership leads to system unreliability and hazardous conditions for the next crew.
• The Experience Trap: Why veteran linemen often fall victim to complacency while newer workers suffer from a lack of quality mentorship.
• Minimum vs. Excellent: A breakdown of why following OSHA regulations is merely the "legal minimum" and not the same as operating at an excellent safety level.

In the second half, Danny delves into the psychology of human performance and the heavy burden of leadership.

• The Pilot’s Perspective: Comparing "Cockpit Resource Management" to the teamwork required in a bucket truck to prevent fatal mistakes.
• Non-Verbal Endorsements: The dangerous message sent when a leader watches an unsafe act and says nothing, essentially "signing off" on the risk.
• The Artist in the Field: A final reflection on moving from being a laborer to a "craftperson" and ultimately an "artist" who works with hand, brain, and soul.

1. What is Danny Raines' definition of "Accepting the Unacceptable"? It is defined as accidents or close calls caused by human performance failures or leadership accepting less than what is required by standards and regulations.

2. Why does Danny believe that following regulations is not enough? He argues that regulations and industry standards represent the minimum precautions required to be "legal," but they do not equate to operational excellence or the highest level of safety.

3. What is a "non-verbal endorsement" in a safety context? It is when a leader or peer witnesses an unsafe act and remains silent. This silence sends a message to the rest of the crew—especially inexperienced members—that the behavior is acceptable.

4. According to the transcript, who is ultimately responsible for safety on the job site? While the employer is legally responsible and accountable to OSHA, the transcript emphasizes that the employee is the only one who can identify and correct unacceptability the moment it happens on-site.

#LinemanSafety #OperationalExcellence #UtilityIndustry #HumanPerformance #SafetyLeadership #DannyRainesCUSP

Subscribe to Incident Prevention Magazine - https://incident-prevention.com/subscribe-now/

Register for the iP Utility Safety Conference & Expo - https://utilitysafetyconference.com/

The Voice of Experience with Danny Raines podcast is produced by the same team that publishes Incident Prevention. It delivers insights based on Danny's regular column in the magazine, also called the Voice of Experience. To listen to more episodes of this podcast, as well as other podcasts we produce, visit https://incident-prevention.com/podcasts. You can reach Danny at rainesafety@gmail.com

Purchase Danny's Book on Amazon - https://a.co/d/04PvuEyn

_______________________________

This podcast is sponsored by T&D Powerskills. If you are looking for a comprehensive lineworker training solution, visit tdpowerskills.com today and use the exclusive podcast listener promo code IP2026 to receive a 5% discount!

Read the article written by Tom Cohenno, Ed.D., CSP, CUSP, NBC-HWC: https://incident-prevention.com/blog/spiritual-preparation-for-safer-work/

The provided text explores the concept of spiritual preparation as a vital component of occupational safety, particularly within high-stakes utility work. It argues that while rules and training are necessary, they often fail when workers face stress or fatigue, leading them to take calculated risks. To bridge this gap, the author advocates for the development of a personal moral code that provides workers with a sense of purpose and identity during adversity. Drawing on philosophical excellence, military discipline, and psychological connection, the source suggests that internalizing values like "being a brother’s keeper" ensures consistent behavior when shortcuts seem tempting. Ultimately, this approach aims to reduce serious injuries and fatalities by anchoring professional decisions to deep-seated convictions rather than temporary convenience. This defensive working mindset encourages employees to clarify their standards before entering high-pressure situations to ensure they return home safely.

• The Risk Gap Phenomenon: Serious injuries often occur not because workers are ignorant of rules, but because they consciously decide to bypass them due to "perceived risk"—subjective feelings that a shortcut is safe because "it will only take a second".
• Neurological Failure Under Stress: Under high pressure, the logical prefrontal cortex "powers down," and the amygdala (emotional center) takes over, causing people to prioritize immediate values like speed or convenience over abstract safety protocols.
• Redefining "Spiritual" Preparation: In a safety context, "spiritual" refers to an individual's internal collection of commitments and moral code—the standard they refuse to drop below even when exhausted or unmonitored.
• The Power of Premeditation: Using the concept of Arete (excellence of character) and Premeditatio Malorum (premeditation of evils), workers can mentally "micro-dose" stress by visualizing hazards in advance, ensuring their response is deliberate rather than panicked when a crisis occurs.
• Shared Duty as a Shield: Strong internal commitments, such as the US Army’s model of spiritual fitness or a shared sense of duty, can override biological self-preservation instincts to ensure team safety during chao

1. Why is traditional safety training often insufficient during a high-pressure crisis? Traditional training targets the rational, rule-following brain. However, during extreme stress, the brain’s logical centers may "lock away" the rulebook, leaving unconscious drivers and immediate values to dictate behavior.

2. What is "Premeditatio Malorum," and how does it improve safety? It is a classical philosophy practice of visualizing potential problems (like equipment failure or storms) before they happen. This "practices the panic" while the rational brain is still online, so that if the event occurs, the nervous system recognizes it as a familiar situation rather than a novel threat, preventing a blinding spike of cortisol.

3. What happens when an individual's personal moral code clashes with a toxic company culture? The transcript poses this as a critical conflict: when a worker’s internal commitment to safety meets an "unspoken culture" that demands speed or profit at all costs, the worker’s "armor" may eventually crack, or they may be forced to leave the organization entirely to protect their integrity.

Subscribe to Incident Prevention Magazine - https://incident-prevention.com/subscribe-now/

Register for the iP Utility Safety Conference & Expo - https://utilitysafetyconference.com/

#WorkplaceSafety #IncidentPrevention #SafetyLeadership #OperationalExcellence #HumanFactors

_______________________________

This podcast is sponsored by T&D Powerskills. If you are looking for a comprehensive lineworker training solution, visit tdpowerskills.com today and use the exclusive podcast listener promo code IP2026 to receive a 5% discount!