What's Your Opinion: Is the term 'accident' acceptable, or should 'incident' always be used?

An accident is an unforeseeable event that cannot be properly prepared for. An incident is an event that occurs in a foreseeable situation. Driving fast in a circle is an event. To drive in a controlled speed with controlled environment would be the event. If something was to happen that wasn't foreseen would be an accident. Put a number of cars in this environment , take away the controlled environment don't limit the speed, it is now foreseeable that an event can occur.

if should incident always used ,accident is acceptable to take Sevier action on that issues.

I have difficulties accepting the term "accident". As parents we teach our kids its okay to have an accident in your pants. Its okay to fall off your bike, its only an accident. These examples follow workers into adulthood where everything done is just an "accident". Accidents are failures in management systems. Accidents are failures in awareness and sometimes accidents are just poorly executed work plans that did not account for or consider the actual risks. To call these "accidents" is inappropriate. The term incident or even event is more appropriate for our use in understanding and correcting failures that result in near miss events, injury incidents or worse.

All accidents are preventable. All events that happen are incidences. Some just have bad endings if no one takes the responsibility to prevent it from going bad. That is why any action taken must be taken with forethought and planning. Other words "proper training".

Accidents result in disease injury or death Incidents are near accidents -had potential for one or more injuries or diseases

I think 'incident' should be used. After investigation, the event can be classified as an accident ... preventable and unpreventable (although, we should always 'be prepared')

Dan has it exactly right, though we also understand accidents to be the result of unintentional actions, which is true. But risk management for injury prevention is all about "foreseeing" what the untrained eye sees as unforeseeable. And investigations typically find hazards that CAN be seen that contribute to incidents that cause injuries.

In the transportation industry, "Accident" has a very specific regulatory definition. This creates lots of confusion when working with other industries. "Incident", however, is universal.

Unfortunately, not all incidents are accidents. Accident implies that something was unintentional. Incident is a broader term that allows the investigation to determine if something was an accident.

An incident is an event, usually negative. Therefore, every negative occurrence in safety is an incident. If the incident/event is not preventable, it's an accident. An example of an accident: A sizable wild animal that leaps out of the weeds directly and immediately in front of a vehicle and makes serious contact with the vehicle while the vehicle is traveling at a reasonable speed.

Accident implies no ability to prevent. I use collision or crash for vehicle incidents and injury for injuries. Incident is used for both vehicle and injury incidents.

"Accident" acceptable under some conditions although it is not interchangeable with "incident."

Since it is estimated that 94-96% of all "accidents" are caused by unsafe condition, or an unsafe act, that percentage should be called incidents.

The term "accidents" implies that something happened and nothing could have been done to prevent it. I believe you need to have a mindset that all such things are preventable and accept nothing less. Thus, I believe the term "incidents" is what should be used.

I looked up the definition for each. They're pretty much the same. I prefer "crash" for automobile "accidents" because the results are foreseeable, based on driver actions, therefore no longer an "accident" or "incident". Perhaps that criteria should obtain for accident vs incident. If the result of a behavior is foreseeable and behavior continues anyway, no longer an "accident".

Everything should stay as it because OSHA has a great definition for both words. The OSHA definition of an accident is any unplanned action or event that leads to the injury or illness of an employee. The OSHA definition of an incident is any unplanned action or event that could have led to the injury, illness of an employee, property damage or disruption of business. Both are always preventable but they have totally different meanings.

Call 'em what they are....injuries if a person is hurt, collision if it's a vehicle incident. Few incidents are TRULY accidents, i.e. unforeseen events.

There are no accidents. Situations ending in injury or damage are based on a cause(s) and effect relationship and should be called an incident.

The word accident and incident, by definition and etymology, are interchangeable. An accident is, by definition, an unintended event and does not imply preventability or severity. All accidents are preventable, they are born from unsafe acts and unsafe conditions/equipment - both of which should be addressed long before any occurrence regardless of severity or what word you use to describe it.

Accidents gives the impression that nothing could have prevented the occurrence. All accidents are a form of incident; but not all incidents are accidents.

Our definition of Accident is an Incident that results in a loss. Thus, most incidents are accidents because at a minimum there is usually a loss of productivity but usually much more including property and vehicle damage and/or injuries. An incident may be someone pulling out of dock slip with red light on but fortunately escaping any damages or injuries as a result but ultimately we would have to consume productivity to preform remedial training and other corrective actions so one may still consider that a loss to the company.

While I use the word incident the majority of the time there are instances that are beyond our human control that have resulted in an accident or injury that through normal operations, maintenance , pm or inspections failed to provide the prevailing condition. Stress fractures in metal are never seen unless we x-ray every square inch of our dies, overhead crane supports, railways... which is not feasible. If it is foreseeable and preventable then it is an incident. We had an employee walking the trail we created around the facility as part of our wellness program and a limb fell out of a tree creating a contusion and a cut requiring stitches. We could not have foreseen this event and no we do not routinely inspect every tree on the trail to look for damaged limbs so I have no problem calling this an accident.

Too many people understand "accident" to imply "not preventable" or "act of god."

They should be called incidents or something other than accidents. Accident implies is could not be prevented, most of the time not true.

All events are incidents even if they are beyond ones control. Accidents are just that, accidental.If someone is taking a shortcut it is not an accident. Until it is investigated it is an incident.

I cannot take the survey because I disagree with both statements. I agree with commenters who say that there are times when an incident may properly be called an accident. The survey needs at least one more question somehow worded to allow for that possibility and viewpoint. As it now reads it is biased against that viewpoint.

I personally like the term incident. From there one can go on to describe what happened, to whom, where and so on. When the term accident is used it implies that nothing could have been done to prevent it.

In my opinion, "accident" infers something that could not have been avoided or prevented. I believe that all injuries/incidents are preventable, and therefore only use "incident"

Like Gary (February 2, 2016) I cannot take the survey because there should be more choices than the two offered. I don't think "accident" and "incident" are interchangeable nor do I think "Only incident" should be used. There is a third choice - incident or accident should be used based on the circumstances. . As Doug Matkins stated (January 26, 2016) not all incidents are accidents. I agree that Incident is a broader term which allows the investigator to determine if the event was an incident or should it be classified as an accident. As others have stated, accident implies the event was "avoidable". Some "accidents" involve only one person (slip, trip or fall) without an exterior cause. For example, I step to closely to the curb and trip. The curb did not "cause" my fall, only my inattention. Would that be an accident or an incident? If I slipped on a rug that was not properly attached to the floor and fell, I would consider that an accident since it was preventable. As others have also stated "accident" can imply preventability - but not always by the individual involved in the accident - think "hit-and-run".

Incidents are preventable, thus cause(s) can be foreseen. If you see an individual working at a height without proper fall protection, because it would only take a minute. We all know the incident rates regarding falls. Accidents are not, e.g., weather and seismic events, but they can be mitigated through design of structures, and planning for blizzards and hurricanes, for examples. Therefore, most, if not all, of the events that occur at work and our daily lives are incidents. I disagree with Mr. Saliken's synopsis that when driving at a controlled speed with a controlled environment and an event happens, then it is an accident. Since the activity is controlled--maintenance, inspections of equipment, clean roadway, and a rested driver--the event is probably due to driver, maintenance, inspection errors. Something(s) can be identified as to what led to the event, and procedural changes could have prevented the incident. I agree with Mr. Hughes' assessment regarding how the term accident is improperly used by parents, media, e.g., "There was an accident on State Road 102 today, which led to... " Most highway engineers use the term crash to define this particular type of event.

The term "accident" has the connotation that there's nothing that I could have done in this situation. It was beyond my control. An incident is an occurrence. Ex: A defensive driver does everything possible to drive safely. Despite that effort, if a driver in the opposing lane crosses the center line at the very last minute and the two vehicles collide, the opposing driver caused an incident which resulted in the defensive driver being involved in an accident. The opposing driver could have done something to prevent the incident while the defensive driver could not as it was beyond his/her control.

Accident implies fault. Incident implies an unwanted event. Identifying an unwanted event as an incident is useful when performing an investigation. The intent should be to identify causal factors not place blame.

People are taught from young that accidents are acceptable. "That's ok it was just an accident". For that reason we use Incident.

"Incident" is a more inclusive mindset of people, environment, assets and reputations w/ a preventative/proactive thought process in addressing the "why" and not just the "how" which is often associated w/ an "Accident" and is sometimes an acceptable and/or reactive thought process, that they just happen.

I explain the difference to employees this way: Driving my car and I get hit by a drunk driver. It was an accident for me because I could do nothing at the time to avoid it but it was an incident for the drunk driver because they could have done something else, such as take a cab home. Events at work (and home) are generally incidents.

They should be termed incidents. The term accident implies that there is no way the incident could've been prevented. In theory, there is no such thing as an accident due to the cause and effect philosophy. In other words, for an "accident" to occur, there has to be a cause and that cause could have been prevented.

Accident it makes feel big and bad But Incident not like that Psychologically

incident is what happens, ie tornado etc.Failure to formulate an emergency plan is not accidental.

The term "incident" is more all inclusive. Using the word "accident" can tend to sound like a vehicle was involved, where "incident" can be used to describe an injury, a near miss, damage to equipment, etc.

Incident is more acceptable in my opinion as construction has many variables that make for incidents. Accident is more truncated in its term where it speaks directly too a situation like cars on a highway. There are numerous hazards that exist on a construction site compared to transportation/highways.

An accident is a Management spin word that suggests that these things can happen. An incident should require an investigation and future preventive measures taken.

Generally, accident is referred to incidents that involve some kind of loss either through injury or property damage or both. Today the importance of those incidents that do not cause any damage has been realized. Therefore it is important to override the term accident and start mentioning incident at all levels. The incidents can be further categorized as those causing any injuries / property damage or mere near miss incidents.

We as safety professionals need to be serious about these terms. The term "accident" implies that there was no definitive cause or means of prevention. "Incident" simply describes that an event took place and an investigation will determine any further classification. It's important for employees to get away from a term that takes thinking out of the process - "accidents" almost never happen.

Incident implies something happened. Accident implies something unexpected, unplanned happened. For some workplaces, with known but uncorrected risk factors (e.g., ergonomics), the use of the term accident provides cover for management -- "We didn't know" -- when in fact the incident was predictable. Deming was famous for saying that a production system makes parts and also makes defects. The defects are not an accident, because with a poorly managed system, the defects are a predictable outcome. David Alexander says the production system makes parts and also makes injuries -- without a change in the system, the injuries & illnesses occur at a predictable rate.

I prefer "Injury;" it is less of a euphemism. If no one was injured, then incident is acceptable. I agree with Dan Saliken's comment about foreseeable and unforeseeable events.

The difference between and incident an an accident is sometimes seconds or inches. Similar to the 'reportable' and 'recordable' issue some have had over the years.

We truly believe that all incidents are preventable and all hazards are controllable. To call a safety incident an accident implies that it could not have been prevented. I often get the what if an earthquake hits or a meteor strikes? Admittedly these things are beyond our control, but could I have mitigated the damage those incidents inflicted with enough money and preparation? To a great extent the answer is yes. I want my employees to understand that just because we say an incident is preventable doesn't mean that they could have personally prevented it. For example, we had 3 employees injured in a horrific car wreck when another driver crossed the interstate median and hit them. They challenged me as to how that could have been prevented? I admit that it left me scratching my head for a time but a few months later we learned that the at fault driver was texting just before the incident. Preventable? Very much so, just not by our employees.

I think that there is such a thing as accidents which is why we shouldn't resort to using the term "incident" only. Too many times what we think is an accident is really an incident because we ignored all factors leading up to the event which means that it was 100% preventable. And clearly we should not use the two terms interchangeably because they have two separate meaning.

While I don't think they are interchangeable, incidents should not be used all of the time, nor should accidents.

I prefer the use of incident. Accident implies it was unintentional, but that is not really the point. A near miss could be called an incident, or an accident that did not result in an injury, but it may also have been intentional such as an employee knowingly bypassing a safety device like an interlock. The word incident, to me, covers any event that could be a leading or lagging indicator relating to safety and health.

I prefer incident to accident. Accident indicates that 'people' have no way of avoiding or foreseeing what's going to happen. An alert and watchful driver or other involved individual will always have avenues available to prevent or avoid what unconcerned and distracted drivers, or others, will get caught up in.

Incident is the proper word to use. Accident can be seen as a negative connotation.

Collision for any impact involving a vehicle, whether preventable or non-preventable, wildlife strike, etc. Incident for everything else - verbal/physical assault, passenger medical issue, missed stop, etc.

I do not believe the term accident should be used when addressing a workplace event. It is an incident, by definition. I would say the only time we would have an accident on a work site would be if a worker was walking across the parking lot and got hit by a meteor. This would be an event that was not preventable and would not have been foreseeable, this would be a total random event. Thank you.

We use the standard terminology from the Center for Chemical Process Safety, OSHA, and the HSE. They all define incident to include both accidents (loss) and near misses (potential loss).

To be a true "accident" it must be unpredictable and unpreventable. Incident should be use be used instead to describe loss events (to people, property and process) that are predictable and preventable.

If medical attention is required, I think it should be labeled an accident, if medical attention is not required I say call it and incident.

Incident- because when many people hear "accident" they think personal injury which often is not the case. Also accident also makes employee think it has to be someone fault, but with incident employee likely to think what happened.

Neither. If you think about the true definition of "accident" it implies an act of god or something outside of your control (which really makes the safety tenet, "all accidents are preventable" imprecise). Incident essentially means the same thing but includes accidents and the infamous "near accidents". The problem with both is that an injury or crash or other loss event has occurred that needs to be investigated, addressed and fixed. I believe that using accident or incident lessens the importance of what has actually happened. At my organization we opted for a simple definition. "Loss". When an injury or crash or spill occurs it is simply a loss. And it truly is a loss, to the individual, asset, environment or my company. The thing I like about using "Loss" is it is something everybody understands, from the bottom to the top. We all know what loss means and that loss to business is a loss to personnel, assets and to the bottom line. Has worked for us, although old dogma is hard to change and still persists. --Brad

INCIDENT - because accident infers fault. Incident is more neutral.

An incident is an accident. An accident is defined and an unplanned event that may or may not result in personal injury or property damage.

Accidents are events with identifiable causes that occur but can't be prevented, only mitigated. Thus an accident is the result of a seismic or weather event. Also, most lay people think that accidents cannot be controlled, which is true, but they refer to everyday preventable events. While incidents are events that have identifiable causes that are foreseeable and preventable. Thus almost all events that can be prevented should be considered incidents and not accidents.

Incident only: Reduce confusion, we can all use a bit of that in the safety world!

This reminds me of the endless parade of political correctness or group think, where Americans have to all use the same words to explain the same thing so that everyone understands and no one is confused or offended. Language is nuanced. Words are not interchangeable. I find it very helpful to use both terms and distinguish between 'accidents' and 'incidents.' For example: incidents, which may or may not cause property damage, have all the dynamics of an accident, but with no injuries. Accidents have injuries. If you approach incidents (i.e., investigations, corrective actions, retraining, process changes, etc.) as if they were an accident, then subsequent injuries could very well be prevented. However, to do that you have to explain the two and understand them as distinctly different, but requiring the same priority or urgency. In addition, it would counter-productive to create a distinctive jargon or “safety language” to make our field of work special. Every audience is different and so we need to be free to communicate differently to each audience. Uniformity, in this case, is not helpful. In fact, it could be a barrier.

As an engineer who frequently performs incident investigations I prefer the more neutral term incident since accident implies a potential pre-existing bias regarding the eventual cause determination.

The two may have slightly different dictionary meaning but both could be prevented. There is always a root cause for the accident/incident any without determining the root cause there could be a re-occurrence.

I feel Incident should always be used. I come from a volunteer fire background and very seldom have I been on a call that was, by definition, an accident. just about everything that does happen is preventable by the persons involved.

To me, "accident" implies that it has been determined that something totally outside of the affected individual's control caused the event. The term "incident" implies that the true cause has yet to be determined, but that all potential causal factors will be evaluated, looking at systematic, organizational, process, equipment and individual performance contributors.

'Accident' means something different to many people. It's an HSE booby-trap. How many times does a worker brush something aside with that term? Too many! Outside of terrorism or workplace violence, all such events are unintentional, so to split the hair further is not productive. They are all incidents, and since we should treat and investigate regardless why then add this cornfusion? The CSB calls everything an Accident, so relying upon a federal government definition is unreliable, which department or agency to reference? That can only cause an accident.

If Kenneth's comments are correct (I don't doubt they are), then OSHA's definitions are different than NSC's. The NSC lesson that incidents is a preferred term is a good lesson; although the lesson doesn't preclude all workers from agreeing on the slight variation of terminology/definition. I'd say the arena you are in (as mentioned by others) can affect the terminology... DOT/NHTSA certainly use the word accident predominantly. The public (meaning everyone) believes the words are interchangeable, and the dictionary defines them pretty close. If you add environmental (say EHS), than an incident might mean a spill or release, and accident might mean a larger spill or release. I think they are interchangeable, and each organization needs to define them in a policy statement or safety program; if for no other reason to help their workers understand what the terms mean.

Tomorrow's accidents are foreseeable if we take a long hard look at today's incidents. Changing our terminology from accident to incident is an important step towards recognizing the casual causes which expose us to unnecessary risks.

"Accident" is derived from Latin meaning "an event." From all dictionaries, "incident" is a synonym in the noun form. Attaching other meaning to these words is an inaccurate use of English, causing potential miscommunication and improper translation to other languages. It is more appropriate when conveying a negative event to use an appropriate adjective in order to remove all doubt. A majority in a limited and skewed population survey has no jurisdiction over changed to the English language.

All incidents have to include two things: an unsafe act AND an unsafe condition. If a plane crashes into a building, it is never an accident, not even for the people inside...it's an incident caused by unsafe acts and unsafe conditions. Accidents have no unsafe act. They are acts of nature (tree falls, heart attacks, etc.)

Surely the word Accident should be done away with as it refers to the assumption of unfortunate or ,just one of them things ,well the word that should replace it is Inccident as there is always a blame the word Accident gives people the wrong perspective of an occurrence,.

I so tired of the word accident being used to describe an incident especially when it takes place on the road. When a car crash or collision occurs on Australian roads there is always a reason for it for example the driver may be speeding or using his phone which then causes such an incident so why do we use the word accident for everything that happens. Such a commonly used word when really the word "accident" should hardly ever be used in almost everyday situations. Thankyou

Accidents result in disease injury or death Incidents are near accidents -had potential for one or more injuries or diseases. Thanks for sharing such a great information with us.

I believe the recent incident of the horse trainer Gordon Elliott pictured sitting on a dead horse he would have been trying to improve as a racehorse and thereby provide the horse with a privileged life. Was an example of public misdirected outrage. One full of frustration of life due to their inability to carry on their day to day business due to Covid. Accidents happen all the time professionally and humans who work closely with other sick humans who die often sit afterwards and relax perhaps chatting with a colleague. Should all doctors who lose a patient and discuss what they are doing for lunch afterwards be sacked or should all undertakers who chat about the football match on the tv while preparing a corpse for burial be sacked. The media sensationalised the incident and manipulated the outcry, the representation for Gordon Elliott was pathetic. The man is a horse trainer and a very successful one at that, he will have incidents like this in the future and at any one moment none of us can predict how we will react when we are in our own zone and not being filmed.

I pulled over safely when my trailer tire blew out. Unfortunately the tire continued to burn and soon my whole trailer was on fire. This had nothing to do with my driving but was recorded as an accident. So Incident would make more sense