subject: The Necessity For Safety Devices [print this page] J. C. Delaney, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science Vol. 38
The views of this field, covering the matter of accidents, have been supplied to the public domain. These views cover an extensive ground, and I shall confine my remarks to only certain features in the field of accidents. It has since been estimated that lives are lost and serious wounds are inflicted every time in the United States, by machinery, than the amount of those killed and wounded in the battle of Gettysburg. In this particular estimate, accidents on railroads and steam boats are not included. I believe the estimate is too low, more so than too superior. But whether one or the other, we know that the casualties from machinery are not creditable to an age so far advanced in the sphere of philanthropy, the arts and sciences. All these killings and injuries are called accidents. But in the same way as an accident is something out of the range of ordinary planning, the term accident is, I think, often misapplied.
These so-called accidents are the consequence of three causes: Carelessness on the part of the injured; carelessness on the part of a fellow-employee; and carelessness on the part of the employer. The first two of these causes might be dismissed in place of the present as coming incidentally within the scope of this subject.
In the sphere of all effort put forth to prevent accidents from machinery, the first class of employers only need slight, if any, aid or else encouragement. Employers of that title are always alert to obtain the newest and top-of-the-line safety appliances, and they know the useful from the useless. The secondary class of employers would not hesitate to follow the humane law of installing safety appliances, but are restrained because they do not know about the construction of the very machines which are amassing those fortunes. The third group of employers considers their employees to be tools of trade, to be left to their own rescue devices, and their own feeling of caution. A newly hired employee can be cheaper than that of a safety appliance.
I made these distinctions for the reason that I hope to be fair to all classes, and just to the in the public domain as well. And furthermore, it is crucial that such distinctions in classes of employers ought to be recognized before we look-in to preventing construction accidents from machinery, or else to reduce the amount to a minimum.
To prevent an accident is better than to suffer from it in the sphere of pain or else loss of money. But how prevent? In response to this query, I would suggest inspection maintenance for all parts of machinery.
