Zero has been the open religious mantra for safety for 7 years. The evidence for this cult is beyond debate (https://safetyrisk.net/if-you-want-to-know-about-culture-dont-start-with-safety/). The evidence for its support is overwhelming (https://safetyrisk.net/the-sponsors-of-zero-are/) especially from so called ‘safety differently’ groups. It also receives overwhelming support from regulators and safety associations.  I did a search on SEEK for ‘zero harm advisors’ and there were 363 jobs available that referred to it.

And, if you speak against zero you are somehow anti-safety. This is how the silly binary ad from Transport for NSW works (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ra5LK8x86zU).

The reality is, zero ideology is the fundamental value, attitude and belief of the safety industry. It shapes and influences every part of its culture. It was centre stage at the safety congress of 2023 (https://visionzero.global/). THis is the culture of safety.

Make sure you go to the zero-vision page to get your news about nothing:

When perfection is your ideology (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/zero-the-great-safety-delusion/) then all that follows will be brutal and characterised by policing. This is the culture of safety (https://safetyrisk.net/the-culture-of-safety/).

All of this nonsense-speak that debates that there is no safety culture or indeed, no culture at all (in mind-blowing ignorance) is based on astounding lack of intelligence about culture. Cultural ignorance is one of the prime characteristics of safety culture. Ignorance is cultivated by Zero. Once you have ‘zero’ as your mantra, goal, linguistic frame and prime, all that follows must be influenced by it. And it doesn’t matter if you call it 1% safer, it’s the same ideology rebranded.

And once you have argued that safety culture should not be discussed (Busch), all that happens is the emboldening dominance of the culture of zero. Once you’ve said don’t talk about it, you can’t then talk about it. Silence about safety culture enables the power of the dominant culture of safety.

Yet, our survey shows (https://safetyrisk.net/update-on-zero-survey-just-believe/) (with ove 4000 respondents) that safety people on the ground don’t believe in zero. Indeed, they believe that zero promotes dishonesty and is a religious ideology. No wonder so many in safety want to leave the industry.

No wonder the work of Rosa Carrillo describes safety people as ‘voices in resistance’ (https://safetyrisk.net/ohs-voices-from-the-resistance-rosa-carrillo/). And this resistance is against the zero culture that has been cult-ivated by regulators and associations in fairy-land. No-one at the coal-face of high-risk work believes the impossible and speaks nonsense to people (https://safetyrisk.net/believe-the-impossible-and-speak-nonsense-to-people/).

Zero is the greatest source of division in the industry. The reason why the so-called not-so-differently movement exists is in resistance to this dominant culture in safety. It’s unfortunate that the many manifestations of this group continue to talk about performance and frame discussion by injury rates.

And, once zero gets in anywhere under the guise of ignorant binary argument, you can’t get it out.

Zero is the most unethical ideology one could ever introduce into any organisation. It is the foundation for brutalism and dehumanising safety. We even have so-called ‘safety differently’ people (who are not ethicists) talking about zero as some kind of moral goal (https://safetyrisk.net/zero-is-an-immoral-goal/).

There is nothing moral or ethical about expecting perfection of fallible people.

Zero sets up every safety person in a moral dilemma.

Every zero-harm advisor must advise on what cannot be achieved and be held accountable for injury and harm. No wonder safety people are under enormous stress (https://carrilloconsultants.com/product/voices-from-the-resistance/).

This is the culture of safety.

Just imagine an association (AIHS) publishing a chapter on ethics that makes no mention of this dominant ideology! The truth is, there is no room for ethics in a zero mindset (https://safetyrisk.net/no-room-for-ethics-zero/). That same chapter on non-ethics makes no mention of the most dominant theory of ethics in this day ‘care ethics’. If there was any care ethics in safety, there would be no zero.

• This is why the culture of safety is NOT about care and helping.
• This is why safety people don’t want to join such an association.
• This is why safety people and workers dislike the regulator.
• This is why regulators brutalise people.
• This is why ethics is rarely discussed in safety circles as being relevant to being considered a professional.
• This is why safety is an industry NOT a profession.

This is the culture of safety.

The only way to improve safety is to jettison zero so that things can improve (https://safetyrisk.net/moving-away-from-zero-so-that-safety-improves/).

All of the organisations that get rid of zero find that safety quickly improves. All of the organisations that do SPoR and get rid of zero, find that safety can be easily humanised. Here’s a case study of a large global organisation that has done exactly this (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/it-works-a-new-approach-to-risk-and-safety-book-for-free-download/).