I sat in the back row of the jury box listening intently as the plaintiff's lawyer made his case. A homeowner was suing a real estate agency for misrepresenting a leaky basement as dry. The attorney was questioning the owner of a basement waterproofing service. “How does your process work?” The reply was instant and unexpected. “Good.” Both the witness and the attorney were intelligent people. But, the lawyer wanted information about the process. He repeated the question, emphasizing the word “how” with hand gestures. The witness reflected for a moment and said, “real good!” Someone in the courtroom chuckled. The jurors looked at one another. Seemingly, the witness was the only person who didn't understand the question. After an assist from the judge, the lawyer got a description. But the point of the questioning was lost in the confusion.

As a former driver-education teacher, I learned early that sentence structure is important. “Turn left at the next traffic light” could result in a premature turn if the student reacts suddenly. Some do. “At the next traffic light, turn left” is less likely to result in a reactive turn across traffic because the prompt precedes the behavior. Caution also should be applied when using slang, technical terms and directions. Is the tool located on the wall on the right if you use a different door? One may question the I.Q. of those who have difficulty with such minor variations. But a mental block can affect just about anyone. We're all susceptible. As we become more familiar with coworkers and routines, we make assumptions and expect that behaviors will be repeated under similar circumstances. When those expected actions fail to occur, an injury may the result. Relying on the knowledge and good will of your coworkers is a poor substitute for locking out electrical power.

Regulators are careful to define technical terms and requirements to minimize confusion. It's the everyday language (and omissions) that provoke questions of interpretation. For example, the Mine Safety and Health Administration's metal/non-metal fall protection standard (56/57.15005) is titled Safety Belts and Lines. The title makes only indirect reference to fall protection. It requires that safety belts and lines be worn where there is a danger of falling. There is no provision for attaching the line to an anchor. That is assumed. Minimal guidance is provided for confined space entry where a second person is required to tend the lifeline (still with no provision for attachment to a secure anchor point). If tended incorrectly, that added provision could place the attendant in danger of being pulled into the confined space with a falling entrant.

Fortunately, we understand that 56/57.15005 is a minimum standard. Safety belts, once used for fall arrest, are no longer approved for that purpose. A harness used as a part of a fall-arrest system must fit snugly, and the lanyard must reach from the harness to a substantial anchor point. In confined spaces, an attendant must monitor the work conducted by the entrant and manually adjust the length of the lifeline at the anchor point providing the slack necessary while limiting the potential free-fall distance. Self-retracting lifelines eliminate manual adjustments, but not the monitoring function.

Sometimes even realistic assumptions generate confusion. Someone (like the lawyer I observed) who is having difficulty finding the right words to accurately describe an instruction may have told you, “Do what I mean, not what I say.” And almost everyone can recall being told, in frustration, “You know what I mean!” The truthful response to that statement could prove to be the difference between safety and injury. Know what I mean?

Randy K. Logsdon, CMSP, has degrees in education and occupational safety. Comments may be sent to him by e-mail at rlogger@comcast.net