Daniel Snyder returns

Today on The Jay Allen Show, Daniel Snyder returns, and he discusses what's going on in the world of safety, he discusses the world of the macabre in training and a new group that he has formed.

Enjoy it all today on The Jay Allen Show.

The transcript is not perfect

[00:00:03] spk_0: this show is brought to you by safety FM. Well hello and welcome to another episode of the J ALLen show. Hopefully everything is good and grand inside of your neck of the woods. Well, it seems like it's been a little while since we've hung out, but we've still been doing the weekly episodes and I guess the friday episodes and the Tuesday episode. So you really haven't missed me if you're going to think about it in that fashion. Even though I've been on the vacation for over the last little bit because I was gone last week just in case you did not know that. I guess I should have shared that with you or did I share it with you? I don't even recall. I get so lost in so many different shows that we've reduced and actually that I'm on at this particular point that I try to keep up anyways, not me not go too long into that and let me tell you what we have going on today. Today, I get to speak once again with my friend Daniel Snyder. Yeah, we go over some of the things that are going on inside of the world of safety and of course we talk a little bit about the world of safety and the McCobb. So let me tell you what ends up taking place a little bit before we get too far into this. As I have told you time and time again, technology is great until it fails you. And unfortunately, this is one of these conversations that Daniel and I are going back and forth. But then all of a sudden, well let's be realistic, our link, our hook up in regards of the technology that we're using to be able to communicate uh, tends to bottom out. So I don't want you to feel when you get to the end of this thing that you know, I left you hanging. But it does this kind of drop its or one particular point or the other during the conversation. So you'll notice that. So I apologize ahead of time. So it some other time we're going to have to have Daniel back for him to talk a little bit more about what he's got going on. So take a listen to this episode of the J ALLen show with me talking to Daniel Snyder right now. They show is streaming now on safety FM dot life. So how are things with you? I mean like overall how are things ban everything's good, everything's good busy, you know, things are starting to pick up and got a few good projects and working some uh good expert witness legal work where I get a read all kinds of depositions and attorneys claims to what safety is and help define that. It always has to be an interesting thing because I'm sure that as you're going through this, it changes for you. So today it could be this six months down the road. It could be something entirely different from where you were, six months ago. Oh yeah. You know I always joke when I was doing exam prep, you know, we're kind of at at whiskey instant experts, you know to where if I'm working on a project that requires me to have a knowledge of N. F. P A 30 for spray flammability. You know, I've got to determine can I get up to speed in a reasonable effective way or do I need to hire somebody? Do you know? And uh I've been to where I've been all over something like that for six months with a client and knew that in and out and talk to experts and really was up to speed and six months a year later, I can't remember the standard name. You know, I'm struck, I've already moved on in part because things can change so frequently. I mean just take a look at some of the things that are going on now, you have an OSHA standards that's out there. All of a sudden something changes right away. We're trying to implement something new. Then all of a sudden it's like, okay, so hold on, three months ago you said this now, what's going on? And then you gave away the trade secret there that you actually sometimes out hire somebody from the outside. Don't give it away quickly. Hey, I'm all about bringing in the talent, you know, and if you, if you can, and it's feasible and get the right people with the right mind on the right project, even if it's for a limited amount of time, you know, I can find that saves a lot of hours instead of groping and trying to reinvent the wheel, you know, call somebody and by the time for for a couple hours and you might just save you a ton of work. No. Like I always tell people, it's like if you can do that, do it because as opposed to you having to do tons of research, as long as, you know, they can vent the material for you. It doesn't ever hurt. Right. Right. So, you know, all goes good. How's how's everything down in florida for you? Uh, Well, we we are good. We are good in this general direction. The way that I look at it is that everything is going up and going. Um, our our governor is pretty interesting down here. I mean, in regards of you know, certain mandates he agrees with the other mandates. He doesn't. So I look at it. It's a fine time. I don't know. We both live in very hotspot states I believe Missouri in florida. So it's like, you know, I know I'm in the epicenter of the delta in Missouri right now. So. Well, it's interesting because the zip code that I live in um is it's kind of so it's it's just interesting. So I I just can't find looking at and go we can only take it one step at a time. I mean, I always tell people you have to do what you think that's best for you. Uh vaccine. No vaccine. You have to do it based on case by case on what is going on with you. I don't know if people want to turn in political right away and I'm just like let's avoid that. No, I don't I don't get I don't get involved with that discussion. It's like that is entirely your choice and exactly. You know, what did you get one? I'm like, well I did. You know, just you know, I felt it is better than nothing and and the way things go and knowing a little bit about epidemiology, I'm like right, I just love how the conversation changes when you start bringing it up in regards depending on where some people stand with it. It's like, well why would you do that and all that kind of fun stuff? And it's like, well I don't want to put politics into it, but I always look at it go, I can't say that it's political because operation warp speed came out of when donald trump was in office so I can't see it as a political issue because on where it's coming pushed but whatever I see I see you're already turning me into something entirely different. You see that wasn't even part of what I was thinking about talking now man I am bad about that you know I'm bad about that 15 minutes turns into two hours if I'm not handled properly you know but but I appreciate you having me come back on and uh you know that shit and I just kept on to a birthday comment that was already in the chat. I saw shit it must be jake's birthday so I just chimed in and then when you're like no it's not, I've had four or five people I said oh that makes it even better. It was quite interesting cause everybody's gonna be happy birthday. Then I was thinking about it afterwards. I was like are they telling me this because we're celebrating the 4/100 episode of the other show. So that was the only thing that that I was, it was like okay well that might make sense. That's the only thing that I could come up with, so I appreciate you actually jumping into the box. But then you sent me some information and some things do you have going on? And I know that this is actually next week with the B. C. S. P. Foundation Innovation and Research Summit in uh you know next week, august, so tell me about this, tell me about what you have going on. It sounds like you have a group of people coming about getting into into this thing. Yeah, I did. I sent you kind of the prospectus of the focus group or the expert panel and and this is a topic that I know you and I touched on the last time we spoke and the idea of this ethics of the macabre and really what is the ethical dilemma of showing, you know, serious injury fatalities or sif imagery and and and how do we really use that? And I think the dilemma really is a safety and health professionals. That's part of the nature of our profession is the macabre, we have to deal with those things and it's part of how we describe and how we go about our business to to prevent those things and so you can't really prevent them without really having an understanding of them. And part of that understanding is really sometimes getting into the the grotesqueness of of severe injuries and fatalities. And so we know that's part of the business and we know we all as safety professionals have have shown those things, but now we're a few of us are starting to look at how these are being used and some of the things that are going on in our space and profession and that kind of give us pause and say, is that really an appropriate use of that imagery and what constitutes within the bounds of ethics, you know, how or when these kinds of things should be shown or used and so that's kind of where the debate started and we've seen, you know, a lot of times where somebody has shown that shock value. It's interesting. I was talking to one of the panelists, we said, you know, uh we both agreed that were in that age group of we remember Windows 95 and so when I include you in our care board, j you know, so so from from our generation or cohort of professionals, we kind of came of age, a lot of us right now that are in certain levels of leadership and been around for, you know, 30 years. Um you know, it came of age, right in the point when we're really transferring and using this new media of electronic information to deliver training and presentations and things like this, we're also getting a lot of pressure saying that safety training was really boring and safety training really sucks. And we've got to liven it up. We need to use real case studies. We need to use real information and not just static words and bullets are slide. And so I think what took place is these pictures started emerging and we started doing hazard hunts and what's the problem? What's the hazard and which I think is all well and good. And then it started getting into these video clips of almost you know, faces of death or death. And you know, it really started getting into how many people are going to understand that reference the faces of death reference you want to go that, you know? Well, it was back, I I remember seeing on VHS you know, where it was basically 1000 faces of death, where they just had this footage similar to what we see now, where it was a show that really just show the different ways that people die and they were quite, quite graphic in a lot of ways. And so it's kind of one of those taboo a little bit darker and again, it goes back to the McCobb this fascination with death or dismemberment or things like that. It doesn't mean you're evil, it doesn't mean you're you're a bad person, but I grabbed that actually from Sherlock Holmes when he told Watson, you know, you you know, don't pretend like you don't have a fascination with the macabre, you know, and it was kind of where I thought, you know, to do that kind of work or to be interested in that. Uh, it does take a certain fascination with it. And I think in our profession, that fascination is exacerbated by what we do. Uh, we just have to ask ourselves, went into what purpose would we show and how would we depict and how do we characterize and and what would be fair? And just for not only the victims in the in the footage, but then also the people that might be in your audience. So the people you're trying to communicate to. So I just think that we're now at the cusp with a lot of the moments going on with psycho, social safety and health and, and diversity and inclusion and some of these more uh you know, emotional intelligent type skill sets. I think it's very game now for us to really re think and re look how and why we might show certain imagery depicting CIF. And so if I if they can't tie it back to a learning objective or it's not an appropriate audience, um we have to really question why we show it. And I know, and I think in our last time you and I both agreed that we're not being hypocritical or holier than thou you and I think both agreed that we've we've made those mistakes in our career and and we've learned from them and we've read our audience and we kind of reflected and said, you know, that just didn't feel right for me, and I'm not gonna go down that road. And I think a lot of the professionals that I I respected the business for sure, I think went through that growing pain in the late nineties, early two thousands to where we're trying to quite honestly, 11 Panelist put it, we're trying to get attention and the way to get attention with management, that nobody listened to us in your organization and listen to us about safety and health was to try to do this shock and awe, listen to me, or this will happen to you, and or this could happen for the organization. And I think the intentions of the greater good, and I don't want to dissect ethics into consequentialism versus, you know, converse's all these different, you know, plato's intent, but but this idea of, you know, what was the intent? And I think they were all noble purposes. And I think the argument of the logic was, well, it's for the greater good to show these things, so then they're going to be safe. Part of the challenge though is we don't have any research that shows that there's no research that indicates there's been some few studies, but nothing that says that by showing people that information will affect the outcome of the performance as far as safety on the job. They might remember the clip because it struck an emotional, you know, a thing in their brain. But does that really translate into safer work practices across the board? Is that really the face faces of McCobb we want to put on our logo or our marquee as safety professionals in an organization. And I think that's what we have to be careful of. And I think a lot of year more novice or or or professionals that may not have either an experience with a world class safety management system or their young in their career or new to the profession and all they have seen or some of these ways that this has been depicted can easily fall into that. That's the way we should show ourselves and show the importance and the significance and the consequences of these issues. And I just think that you don't have to go that far. I think even a more appropriate or more lasting is to leave a man in, you know, instead of showing the worker die. So maybe a picture of the little girl looking to hold somebody's hand and say what, you know, you can do heartstring stuff as to why you need to to work safely short of actually showing. And and the example all uses when we're a scaffold that actually shows the scaffold to energize. And the guy started smoking literally. The body I mean showed him electrocuted right in front of to show that. I just don't I just think that we have to question how one ethical that victim, that person's family, do we have the rights to the footage? Is it appropriate to show and then who's our audience? And what outcome do we want to have from showing this? I can only think of maybe three or four situations or contexts to where that kind of graphic representation and imagery or videos or pictures would be appropriate. And that's in real high risk or for example, highway patrol or E. M. T. S. First responders are gonna roll up on a scene and they're gonna see guts on the highway and it would be wrong not to prepare them mentally for those images, but for most of your workers and your workplaces and things like that, those type of graphic imagery is, I don't think really way, you know, I don't think you start there. You know, that's something that I think you should should avoid. And there has to be a very well thought out, thoughtful, mindful justification for using. Well, I mean, it's it's interesting because you have a lot of stuff that you unpack there. I mean, it's interesting on how you bring it up, because here's the thing, I can tell you when you go into the whole portion when you're talking about beginners, and now this is actually doing it. I get it at the very beginning, because you don't have enough context to probably go down the path where it's easier to go, okay, let me look true, let me show you this. And if we're talking Pyramid and we're talking to Upper Management, I can go, okay, boom, the pyramid tells me that if we don't do this, this, this and this, we're going to get to this many incidents and this is going to occur. So I get it. Then the other portion that kind of, it's interesting that you put it into your answer is that the emotional, the emotional side that people have to the reaction of what's going on on the screen? Because most of the people that you speak with, or that I have spoken with better saying, um, when you talk to them about, why do you show videos like that? Because I need the audience to have an emotional response for when they go back to their organization, or go back home when they're thinking about this with you taking such a deep dive into psychological safety over the last few over the last bid. Do you think that this brings the value? Do you look at this and go, do people realize what this actually, what kind of effect this actually has overall? You know, I think, I think like most things and ethics and actions, um it depends, you know, and and and I guess that by and large, I would say no, I don't think that's necessary. And I think that you're running the risk of triggering somebody in the audience or or bringing about some stress or trauma or uncomfortableness with showing those things, especially if they're not laid out very thoughtfully within a context. And so if all I did is just show blood on the highway to you and didn't wrap it in any case study context. Didn't give any four warning here is what you're gonna see when we come back from break and we're gonna take a look at this video and we're gonna, you know, dissected and do some analyzing it and you know, how can we prevent a kind of thing. But I would always at least incorporate how can we give fair warning to the audience if I don't know them well, and even if you do know well, you don't know what's in their package you and I might know each other real well and I may not know what things that could could possibly be in your past that that could deal with or if you're an outside trainer and you show something like that and they had a fatality of one of their co workers a few years ago that was very similar or any fatality or any incident in their work, home life, a car wreck of a kid or a wife or husband, all those things play into that trauma. And so when you start poking at those emotive, is that emotional psychology of decision making and processing? You have to at least think about that consequence with the audience and what you're going to show, and then also in modern day and age like us recording this, how are you going to ensure that whatever is said or shown or done stays within the context, so that if somebody were just to grab that without you narrating without you there to bring the context, is it gonna give the same impact or impression? And I would say not so only on those real high risk are those real high consequence jobs to wear? There needs to be that push or it needs to be that sentiment. Um we've had a lot of near misses on a certain thing and we're having a real trouble, but if I'm going to show that stuff to workers and it's that big of a problem, why am I not talking to the management team and the leadership? And maybe those are the people that need to show breath on the highway, and not the guys that have their hands in the machine every day per se. You know, I mean, we can leave it at a certain thing of what they can do. They know what the hazards are a lot of times. And I asked this on the job site, Hey man, what scares you when they start telling you what scares you? I don't need to show a video of that. They don't want to see if they can visualize in their own mind, their imagination what that electrocution would look like. So, um, I think that by and large, I don't see a lot of value in that. I think there's more powerful, more positive ways that we can depict this information uh, to keep things sustainable because showing that shock and awe is not sustainable. Uh, you know, you can't use that keep going to that all the time because it's gonna wear off. And I actually, it could be counterproductive. You're not getting invited to meeting. There's, there's J Debbie Downer kind of thing coming in and, and and and showing how negative, how we're gonna get killed already. Yeah, Well, it puts us in a position or a perception that everything we think about is the macabre negative or death and injury and all that, which is tough to not get into that because that's what we deal with. But it's our role, I think, to pivot and flip that and run it through a few lenses and filters in a way that best resonates with our audience or the work or the job of the task at hand. So, you know, me getting training in the infantry as a combat medic. Yeah, they're going to show pictures of people's, you know, that are quite, quite in trouble. Um, I'm not going to show that to somebody who's a first aid cpr responder in a manufacturing plant. You know, it just, you know, if they have a full E. M. T. Team and they wanted to go that route and they wanted to do a little bit more because they had, uh, this. But if they wanted to train to that level, you got to ask how frequent do these type of gross tests maiming severe injuries happen here, You know? Uh, so, so I don't know, I'm not really a big fan of it, but I can't rule it out and I can't really question other professionals reasons other than just to pose the question. I think that's what we're trying to do with the panel and trying to do with this conversation as we try to push it out and amplify the conversation is for professionals to stop a little bit and reflect when they're considering or looking at some of these images and saying, should I show that? And if so, what, how am I really going to do it in the most effective way? And how am I gonna maybe trying to follow up measure? Was it effective? You know, how would I really know whether it is? Is it worth? It is the risk versus the reward of of showing this kind of footage of this imagery. And will that make well that make the difference if you have. And plus part of the issue I have with the two j probably the bigger issue honestly is humiliation. I just think it's tough to show that kind of footage and then dissect it and then talk about don't be me. And that kind of gets into the game shows we see at conferences and stuff to where you know it's like you show those things and you have those things. Well what now, you know, where does that really go? How do you want me to do things different? And a lot of times it just falls short on the shocking on it really doesn't follow up with a real good dialogue about how do we prevent these things? So that I guess the audience needs to leave with a positive call to action on how to use that information they just received. And so if all they received was a picture of something grocery video, something gross. Say, hey, don't be that guy. Have a good day. That to me, borders line Malfi sis is not malpractice is a professional to, to, to, to throw that out there. Uh, so I think if anything, hopefully we can elevate the reflections among the profession to say what is acceptable, what is not and then it's part of every professional community. How do we police ourselves? You know, not only just our own selves, but how do we police the profession? I've gotten, you know, called a troll on a few of the linked in poses that just, you know, post that stuff and I'll ask questions like, you know, you got permission from the victim, you know, what's the point of this and, and you see it with the comments and I think this is also what irritates me and speaks bad of the profession when you have professionals that are weighing an opinion, professional opinion on the 22nd fatality clip that was probably Pirated From a 3rd real country. How can you testify to that? So that you knew what was going on all the situations. The other thing is the Darwin Awards was kind of the term back in our day, but how do you know these conversations so that you can't fix stupid? And that guy was just an idiot and the worker was wrong? And a lot of this blaming the worker thing without knowing the context, without knowing the situation, without knowing anything to me is just again poor format best and malpractice at worst. So, um, those are I think the issues of the dilemma, the ethical dilemma of showing CIF is what is fair and just to the victim to your audience, How are they going to use that information? Uh is it appropriate for use? Are you re victimizing people both in the audience and the people that you're showing? Uh and then what kind of messaging are you framing around where people are gonna say, I don't want to report that injury or I don't want to talk about getting hurt because I'm going to be used as a poster child and be flapped out everywhere. And I've always been against when they go, well, we asked them, they said they'd be happy to tell their story to everybody and like you're the employee, you're the you're the employer, are they going to tell? You know, So when you decided to come up with this focus group, what was the idea behind it? Like how did you know who to reach out to you or is this something that you had something open? And people could volunteer to it or how did this come about? You know, it was pretty add hawk, uh, you know, the foundation Christine McConnell, who is the director of the Foundation, She, I was following some of my feeds and she says she knew I was interested and she was, I'd love for you to talk about that or do a panel. And I said, yeah, I could put something together and uh, and so it's time and it was a fairly short order. And so we kind of had with Covid and the things that weren't we kind of had to take the people that were there already going. So I had some other people in mind, you know, and trying to find a true uh group of different people outside the industry psychologist, you know, lawyers, all that. I really had this grand idea, but I had to settle with some of the best people in the business that we're already going to be there. And that would be uh Tony Militello. Regina McMichael J. Harf ken Clayman, who's the chair for the uh, psychosocial, uh, you know, safety and health Committee for ISO and and Regina are both on Z 4 90 standard for training. And I know she's been a big spokesperson for, you know, this call for kind of reforming how we do training and tying things too more, uh, you know, positive messaging. And of course she spoke to that with her own experience. Uh J harper who's the vice president of the Loreal for North America and he's going to talk about their policy. They've had some incidents that were pretty big sift that uh he's going to explain how Loreal would view these kind of depictions of imagery and and kind of the good bad, the ugly of that. And then also Jay Rodriguez, who's the business strategic partner director. I would love to hear a makeup company protective on that. That would be pretty interesting to hear. We'd love to hear, especially once the meeting is done on how that comes about exactly what his perspective is on that side, you need to kind of come back and let us know what I will be happy to and I'm sure jay would probably even come on the show and tell you himself. But um, but yeah, they, their, their, their logos beautify the world. And so when, when they look at their visions and missions, when it comes to safety, health, environmental sustainability there about making it beautiful. And so to show uh, an image of it will definitely be interesting to take a look. Did I lose you? Sorry about that? For some reason, it sounds like my audio dropped. I apologize about that. I didn't realize you were still talking. I apologize. No, you were saying that it's their thing was to beautify and then it couldn't. I apologize. Yeah, their their mission is to beautify the world. And so when they look at safety, health and environmental, they want that to be beautiful as well. And so the idea of showing very graphic imagery across from Loreal and their employees and their corporation that would be really against their ethics and values to do that. I think that's I'm not putting words in his mouth, but that's kind of in the conversations we've had. That kind of imagery is is really would be considered unacceptable. Uh and then jay from the B. C. S. P. Mhm. Yeah, so it's interesting that he's part of it. I mean and I mean you have a whole bunch of interesting people but jay Rodriguez actually being the chief strategy officer for the BCS be, how did he come about actually being on there if you don't mind me asking? Well, you know, I've known J for a long time and and uh I think he's he's worked for big corporations, Raytheon, he's with the V. P. P. A Association, so he's been around, he's seen a lot of presentations and done things and so uh J went as far to say people that use that kind of trickery or just gaffes in training or lazy, you're a lazy trainer if you resort to those kinds of shock tactics to get their attention. Well, like I told you, that's what ends up taking place, technology fails and we end up having to bottom out. So there you go, I apologize about that. So here you go, let me share this information with you. Um if you want to find out more about what's going on with Daniel Snyder, you can actually go to his website and that's at safety mentor dot com, that safety mentor dot com and there you can receive some free resources that Daniel has right there, readily available on his website and exactly what other things he has going on. So you can take a look right there on his website and just for the F. Y. I purposes, because I think it's kind of funny that I didn't mention because we didn't have time to cover it, but Daniel now is a director at large for the american Society of Safety professionals. So you see, I can play well with others when it's also done anyway, so that's what we have going on today. I forgot to mention this earlier, at least during the episode itself. Before I forget if you have not come out and hung out on our website. Safety FM Plus dot com. Yes, that safety FM. Then spell out the world Plus P L U S dot com. So safety of M plus dot com right now, for the month of august we got something going on if you want to take a month free or an extended trial bases in come out, type in the word or code august and you'll get a full 30 days of being able to try out the service with the different things that we have available. So that safety of em Plus dot com, just make sure you spell out Plus P L U S dot com. So safety F M P L U S dot com. Anyways, that's the show for today. I've been your safety manager and host jay allen. I normally say that on friday. So I guess it's kind of weird that I'm saying that on a Tuesday. Uh so don't worry, we'll be back with another episode of the J allen show before too long. Goodbye for now. The views and

[00:30:48] spk_1: opinions expressed on this podcast are those of the host in its guests and do not necessarily reflect the

[00:30:53] spk_0: official policy or

[00:30:54] spk_1: position of the company. Examples of analysis discussed within this podcast

[00:30:58] spk_0: are only examples. It should

[00:31:00] spk_1: not be utilized in the real world as the only solution available as they are based only on very limited in dated open source information, assumptions made within this analysis are not reflective of the physician of the company.

[00:31:12] spk_0: No part of

[00:31:12] spk_1: this podcast may be reproduced

[00:31:14] spk_0: stored in a retrieval system or

[00:31:16] spk_1: transmitted in any form or by

[00:31:18] spk_0: any means

[00:31:19] spk_1: mechanical, electronic recording or otherwise. Without prior written permission of the creator of the podcast,

[00:31:26] spk_0: jay Allen.