In the long history of Safety desperation struggling to be relevant, we have this: ‘Punk Rock Safety’

In the long tradition of Safety with a slogan looking for a methodology and method, we observe the continued search by the S2 myth, for metaphors to attack Safety with no alternative. There is no Safety Differently ((https://safetyrisk.net/the-safety-and-new-view-debate/).

Trying to appear alternative without an alternative and claiming to be ‘doing cool shit that works’ is apparently what the Safety Differently (SD) camp seeks to do. Yet, SD has no method, ethic or philosophy, just a few slogans. Observing the transitions of S2, to ‘safety differently’, ‘new view’ and ‘HOP’, demonstrates the fragmented nature of this quest for something better than traditional safety that then retreats back to traditional safety: systems, performance, injury rates, zero (eg. accepting sponsorship from zero organisations at the last and next conference) and spin.

In all of this podcast, there is no shift in worldview, the focus is still on Safety and his systems. I’ll get onto the nature of this podcasts shortly but first let’s have a look at what it is to claim the language of ‘punk’.

Punk sub-culture is known for its alternative approach to orthodoxy, particularly in relationship to the politics and ethic of conservativism. (Of course, the S2 movement doesn’t talk about ethics, politics or worldviews).

Punk rock emerged in the early 70’s as an anarchistic movement perhaps symbolized best by the Sex Pistols hit ‘Anarchy in the UK’ with the opening and provocative lyrics: ‘I am an Antichrist’. This serves as an odd metaphor for an industry that gains in greater religiosity each iteration (https://safetyrisk.net/the-metaphysics-of-safety/).

There is simply no relationship in this podcast between the sub-culture of punk and discussing the nature of audits and the measurement of performance in safety. It is one thing to claim critique of ‘shitty ideas’ in safety and then replace them with the same conservative worldview of more audits and systems simply and theoretically done ‘differently’.

Far from being punk, the podcast endorses the validity of audits, ‘performance’ and safety systems. It does so by making them the anchor and focus of discussion. Poor olde traditional safety simply can’t step outside of such framing. The podcast is framed by conservativism and an orientation driven by auditing. The podcast claims to question ‘science’ but then endorses the myths of scientific method (https://safetyrisk.net/safety-and-the-myth-of-scientific-method/ ). It even suggests sceptically that one could use AI for a PhD dissertation. Just one of the many absurdities in this rambling podcast.

How interesting to claim a thirst for questioning when Safety doesn’t question its own methodology, worldview or paradigm (https://safetyrisk.net/manufacturing-a-worldview-to-fit-safety/).

How interesting that such a worldview as S2 safety, never asks or enquires about alternative worldviews on safety (https://safetyrisk.net/can-there-be-other-valid-worldviews-than-safety/). We even get this strange emotive metaphor that S2 is ’kicking down doors’ in safety. It would be wonderful to see evidence of where this is happening. It would be just as wonderful to see an S2 Methodology and Method that ‘works’.

In the end, this so called ‘Punk Rock Safety’ is more conservativism, non-inspirational spin with no alternative to safety systems, performance and the measurement fixation of safety.

Of course, the semiotics for the podcast are mechanistic and negative, focused on death and hazards. This is entirely consistent with the anchoring of this worldview, nothing new. Just more conservative safety with a different spin and different slogan.

If you are however looking for an alternative methodology and method in risk that is actually different, you could look into SPoR that focuses on none of this traditional safety stuff nor has a traditional safety worldview. SPoR has a very clear methodology and methods (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/spor-and-semiotics/) that work! (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/it-works-a-new-approach-to-risk-and-safety-book-for-free-download/) and these are for free download. (SPoR seeks no sponsorship from any zero organisations as S2 and HOP does).

And if you are really up for questioning, I am always happy for debate and respond to emails about what SPoR is and does. I always reply to any genuine enquiry but have no interest in emails of ‘telling Safety’ rob@spor.com.au. Preaching at me is what most traditional safety emails seek to do.

If you want to know about SPoR and how it works you can also come to the SPoR Convention in Canberra in May (https://spor.com.au/canberra-convention/ ) if you are up for learning ‘outside the box’ and about questioning with a preparedness for an alternative to traditional safety.