I believe that many people who are involved in safety rules have been confronted with the situation that we talk and talk, but nothing changes. So yesterday, in my presentation at the Safety and Health at Work Meeting 2026, I took this as the theme – where does self-destructive behaviour come from.
👉 People don’t ignore safety rules out of carelessness, stupidity or laziness. They do it because it benefits them in some way.
Why is it good for people to ignore safety rules? Just some of the ideas I have put forward:
1. It maintains belonging
In many teams, stating a risk means stopping work, asking an uncomfortable question, breaking the group rhythm. So silence preserves relationships. Belonging is always more important to the nervous system than an abstract rule.
2. It protects the identity of
with self-promotional phrases such as: “I can do it!”, “I’m not weak!”, “I don’t do drama”, a person protects the part of their identity that is used to coping and not complaining. However, a safety rule can mean asking for help, slowing down, acknowledging one’s limits, threatening to belong again. In terms of the threat of being caught up in a slow/loose/loose identity, this is often a greater risk than the theoretical physical threat.
3. It delivers visible value
Systems say “safety first”, but often reward speed,
flexibility, achieving results in the shortest possible time. Addressing safety (e.g. putting on some kind of locking protection can take time). Bending the rule makes a person useful and sometimes gives them a higher reward through more work. When breaking the rule is further “rewarded” with a penalty, new layers of resentment open up.
4. It reduces anxiety
There is a tension involved in noticing and speaking out about a threat. Ignoring it immediately calms you down. It’s a quick win for the nervous system: “Nothing happened, therefore it was OK.”
5. It maintains a sense of control
Rules can feel imposed. Ignoring them restores a sense of autonomy: “I decide.”
So what are we really solving when we talk about safety? It’s not just manuals, procedures, training. It’s only the cost of belonging, the protection of identity, the real values of the
system behind non-compliance and non-compliance that really need to be addressed; what a person has to do to remain ‘good’.
As a conclusion, I pointed out yesterday:
– Every unsafe behaviour has been the best possible choice for a human being at some point (mostly subconscious)
– Behaviour cannot be changed until we understand what it protects.
– Safety is not improved by increasing control, but by changing the meaning of safety by taking the time to dig deep into the human being.
– A mature safety culture does not look for blame, but for an answer why not to do something, even though it is known that it should be done.
Questions that can lead to further questions:
– What does a person risk losing by following a rule?
– Who does this rule-breaking really work for?
– What does our system really reward (NB: Avoid punishment, it triggers school trauma and emotion takes over rationality).
📷 Risto Štukert
