What's Your Opinion: Is OSHA's "shaming" of employers who violate safety rules an effective deterrent?

Penalties alone for come companies are not a deterrent at all. They consider it the cost of doing business. However, once there "crimes" are reported on the OSHA website, especially when you have a contractor who has been issued Willful citations, that can hinder their ability to bid on projects.

Sorry, should have been "their" crimes, not there.

Safety professionals have known for eons now that punitive actions do not change behavior. Shaming employers is a shameful practice and flies in the face of our efforts to be forward thinkers in shaping behaviors by using violations as opportunities to learn and to shape behaviors. Companies committing willful and blatant acts is one thing, but chastising companies and fining then enough to put them out of business when it may have only been ignorance or ineptitude is foolish approach.

If violations are serious, flagrant or repeating, it might be effective in terms of warning others of how a company operates. Otherwise, if violations are due to minor or simple mistakes and misunderstandings, it only serves to create hard feelings that do nothing to actually correct the root cause of the violations.

Sometimes public ridicule and shame go much further than monetary penalties.

"Shaming" could cost a lot more in lost revenue than in penalties, which in comparison is pretty lean even for wilful violations.

It is bad for business to be publicly called out for not providing a safe workplace. Accountability is a fading business concept.

OSHA uses shaming press releases for the political agenda of the OSHA leadership. Eventually, this will come to have a very negative impact on safety professionals as OSHA will use shaming press releases to attack work sites having safety management systems designed and supported by safety professionals as "Not Effective" if they have any injuries or illnesses.

Once OSHA gets this Electronic Tracking of Injuries and illnesses regulation in place they will just publish the listing of the injury rates of larger employers. That will serve as their shaming press release.

Shaming press releases are just political agenda tool of the current OSHA leadership.

The disreputable organizations won't care and the reputable companies will be drug through the mud. Public shaming will become the cyber equivalent of the stocks or public hangings.

I generally agree that using implied shame is a powerful deterrent to use in modification of behavior when applied to deliberate unsafe acts in the workplace or with children by people they respect and admire. Shame is a feeling one gets when they believe they have let down someone whose respect they wish to have. An example is telling your child you are disappointed in them after hearing them spout profanity. This is a good alternative to other punishment if a lot of time has previously been spent earning the child's respect and admiration. However, it is counterproductive for a government regulatory agency to engage in that behavior .The government is often viewed as "big brother", a group out to get you, etc. Because of little funding OSHA mostly responds following an incident or report of unsafe processes that have occurred. They are unable to spend the time necessary to build trust, admiration and respect by the company. In shaming violators they add additional animosity to the their organization from those they blame, the families and friends of the people who work there and other innocent people. It is very unprofessional behavior. The organization would be much better served to simply apply appropriate fines as the law provides. Any additional actions OSHA takes beyond this should always be positive and supportive to companies and the community in an attempt to build trust and respect.

Most employers laugh at penalties as they calmly contact their corporate legal counsel. The monetary penalty is just not enough to prevent safety laxness. One flash of press, however, seems to create a more malleable and proactive company who gears its results to preventing lapses in an attempt to sanitize its branded company name. Just seems like then, the companies try to firmly maintain an improved safety approach as it continues to try re-brand itself to be seen as a better and safer company.

OSHA doesn't just "shame" employers, they attack them. Many employers either don't know that they are not following one of the myriad OSHA regulations, or, through employee misconduct the violations occur. OSHA has tarnished its reputation as being concerned over jobsite safety and more concerned with "catching" employers who don't have the resources or knowledge often to be fully compliant. Their efforts would be MUCH better served by first warning employers, then coaching and training employers in order to partner with them to improve work site safety as was the original Congressional intent.

Shaming companies is an easy but lame way for OSHA to operate. Are there "bad" companies out there that deserve to be publically shamed? Sure. However, the average company that receives OSHA citations - even "serious" citations - is not a "bad actor." Any of us making comments could go into almost any company and find OSHA violations. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that there is a high level of risk to employees.

Embarrassment is a powerful influencer. As a 40-year safety professional, I was there when Environmental began to supplant Safety in importance starting in the early 80’s due mainly to the adverse publicity from environmental events being perceived as irresponsible and intolerable -- so worthy of shame. However, equating violations with OSHA’s actual mandate (to prevent serious injury and death) may be a stretch, with what we now know about SIF – Serious Injury & Fatality prevention. I don’t see a one for one match up of violations with the prevention of serious harm. In fact, OSHA too often has compelled us to misapply our limited resources chasing after BS recordability determinations and such that divert our precious time and attention from what could make a real difference with respect to further minimizing serious harm. Michaels contention that OSHA is under-resourced reflects the administrative state’s regulatory mindset that there needs to be a Nanny State to protect employees from the big bad uncaring companies whose executive leadership are cold and uncaring, etc. In a Just Culture, we avoid defaulting to blaming the worker for making an honest mistake, yet remain fixated on blaming executive leadership for not knowing “everything” with respect to how safe work is not being accomplished in its enterprise. The real issues are shared accountability and everyone living to their fundamental safety responsibilities, but Federal OSHA remains stuck in a 1960’s unionism perpetuated victim mindset of the big bad uncaring company not protecting the employee. Consequently, reading this article simply demonstrates that too many still think more of the same can actually make a difference, though there is no validation for that. If that is you, shame on you !