Punishment/discipline

Discipline and Punish The Birth of the Prison. New York Vintage, 1979. 

The parent-child model says that discipline equals punishment. The adult-adult model says that discipline equals structure. In a parent-child model, both the parent and the child react in an emotional manner. The parent says, I set the rules or Because I say so. This engenders finger-wagging and a you-have-been-bad affifude. The child then responds with I am not responsible, Tell me exactly. .., It is not fair, or Why do I have to ... 

J. Rouse, Power/Knowledge , in G. Gutting (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Foucault (Cambridge Cambridge University Press, 1994), pp. 92-114, p. 102. See also Foucault, Discipline and Punish, p. 27. 

Foucault, Discipline and Punish, p. 143. See also Rouse, Power/Knowledge , pp. 92-9. 

Discipline and Punish The Birth of the Prison (1975), trans. A. S. Smith (New York Pantheon Books, 1978). 

Indeed, formal signage around PPE often lacks any provision for non-compliance in terms of discipline or punishment. Instead, they assume to operate within a reality where everyone complies with PPE requirements. However, this means that any need for discipline and compliance cascades down the site management team the more mundane aspects of the management of PPE in practice are found on site-made signs - handwritten or printed and laminated in the office. Such signs often clearly articulate disciplinary repercussions for non-compliance, threats of re-induction or removal from site can be boldly stated. In such contexts PPE is often reduced to one of the rules - rather than a positive and proactive method of safety management. 

The distinctions between these two voices create a dissonance in the way the enforcement of safety works. Whilst those at the higher corporate level seek to develop and position safety only positively, through no-blame cultures and realities intolerant of violation to the point of denial, those who manage and participate in construction site practices on a daily basis at site level instead have a version of safety firmly positioned within a reality of rules, violations, enforcements and punishments. Yet this latter approach also has the potential to create an understanding, or rather misunderstanding, that safety is the rules, rather than any wider considerations of safety and practice. In fact, when the safety rules are explored in more detail, their associations with safety become rather irrelevant and the enforcement of safety is much more bound up in issues of discipline and punishment on a societal level, rather than the potential consequences of any safety violations themselves. 

With safety violations such a common occurrence, it is not surprising that the punishment and discipline that goes along... 

Restricted by the level of economic development and staff own quality, the safety concept of miners is generally we at present. It is in the dependent and passive position basically. They abide by the rules and regulations only because they are afraid of being punished. The so-called safety first and safety discipline consciousness is fuzzy. In addition, various safety regulations in some enterprises are to some extent on paper or verbal, not into a habit and behavior criterion of all employees, which is not enough to let them consciously accept and promote coal mine safety culture. 

Single ASAP reports can generate corrective actions and, in addition, analysis of aggregate ASAP data can also reveal trends that require action. Under an ASAP, safety issues are resolved through corrective action rather than through punishment or discipline. 

One of the biggest obstacles to reporting a safety issue is that the employee is punished, which is a knee-jerk reaction deeply embedded in safety cultures. The excuse here is Well, I would rather discipline him than have to visit him in the hospital. After an accident people become very emotional, and line management automatically look for who caused the accident rather than what caused the accident. 

---