That question sounds simple, but it lands hard when you’ve been in enough incident investigations to see the pattern: the policy was fine, the training records were fine, the orientation checklist was signed, and yet the work still drifted into risk because the real standard on site was never the binder. The real standard was what leaders allowed to happen in front of them, especially on the busy days when the job got messy, the schedule got tight, and everyone felt the pressure to “just get it done.”
And here’s the part leaders don’t always like hearing, even when they know it’s true: workers copy what leaders tolerate, not what leaders write.
Policies and procedures absolutely matter because they set expectations, define controls, and give you a baseline for training and accountability, but they are not the last line of defence. The last line of defence is the decision a person makes in the moment when conditions are real and imperfect, when access is awkward, the weather is changing, the equipment is acting up, and someone is watching to see whether production or safety will win the argument.
In those moments, crews don’t ask themselves, “What does the safety policy say?” They ask something more practical, sometimes without even realizing it: “What is normal here?” Normal is shaped by what gets corrected quickly and consistently, and it’s also shaped by what gets ignored, laughed off, or explained away as “not a big deal.”
If a written policy says “100% PPE” but supervisors regularly walk past missing eye protection or unfastened chin straps without stopping the work, the policy becomes background noise and the real standard becomes “PPE when it’s convenient, or when someone important is nearby.” That gap between what’s written and what’s actually tolerated is where injuries build momentum, because it trains people to treat risk like a flexible rule instead of a real hazard.
Most leaders don’t tolerate unsafe behaviour because they want people hurt, and most supervisors are not intentionally careless; what happens is that tolerance shows up in small, reasonable-sounding exceptions that feel efficient in the moment. It starts with phrases you’ve heard a hundred times and maybe said yourself on a tough day: it’s only a two-minute task, they’ve done this forever, it’ll take longer to set up the right way, we’re already behind, the customer is waiting, I’ll deal with it later when things calm down.
That “later” rarely comes, and the problem isn’t just the one unsafe act you let slide because you were busy; the bigger problem is the signal you send to everyone watching. When a shortcut happens in front of leadership and nothing is said, the crew learns that shortcuts are part of how work gets done here, then that message spreads fast because people are not stupid and they are always trying to keep up with the pace you set.
Over time, the deviation becomes the method, the workaround becomes normal, and the crew builds confidence in something that should never feel routine: exposure. That’s how drift works, and drift is rarely dramatic at the beginning; it’s quiet, gradual, and it hides behind the fact that “nothing happened last time,” right up until it does.
In Canada, due diligence is practical. It is your ability to show that you took every reasonable precaution in the circumstances, which means you had hazards identified, controls selected, people trained and competent, and supervision active enough to keep the work aligned with the standard when the job changed and pressure increased.
The easiest way to damage a due diligence position is to run a system that looks organized on paper while allowing predictable unsafe behaviours to repeat in the field, because eventually an investigator will ask a simple question that cuts through the binders: if the standard mattered, why did the unsafe behaviour continue in front of supervision?
That is why this topic is not about being strict for the sake of it, and it’s not about “being the safety cop.” It’s about whether your leadership functions as an operational control, meaning it prevents harm in real time when conditions change, when the plan doesn’t fit perfectly, and when people are most likely to cut corners.
Correct one unsafe behaviour immediately every day—no exceptions. And this could start with yourself.
That might sound almost too simple, but it works because it forces consistency, and consistency is what creates culture. It also keeps the goal manageable because you are not trying to fix the entire site in one sweep; you are installing a daily habit that keeps you and your supervisors in the mode of preventing exposure, not just reacting after the fact.
When you correct one unsafe behaviour every day, you do three important things without needing a big program launch. You reset the real standard in front of the crew, you interrupt drift before it turns into routine, and you build a leadership habit that makes safety automatic, even under production pressure.
Keep in mind that you also need to emulate the behavior you want to see the workplace, and you also need to avoid falling back to any old ways that could be a detriment to unsafe workplace behavior.
Correcting immediately does not mean yelling, embarrassing people, or turning every moment into a speech. In fact, the best corrections are calm, clear, and fast because they focus on hazard and control, not personality and blame.
Immediate correction means you address the unsafe behaviour while the context is still real, so the person can see exactly what you mean, understand the hazard they are creating, and reset the method before the exposure continues. If you wait until the end of the shift, you are no longer preventing; you are only documenting that you watched it happen.
A practical way to keep corrections professional is to use a simple flow that fits real worksites:
In normal field language, it can sound like this:
That’s not harsh, but it’s clear, it is tied to real consequences, and it makes the standard visible in the moment when it matters.
Leaders sometimes avoid field corrections because they worry about nitpicking or starting conflict, and that fear is fair if the corrections are random, petty, or inconsistent. The solution is to target behaviours that connect to serious harm pathways, because those are the behaviours that regulators, investigators, and your own conscience will care about if something goes wrong.
If you want this to work, focus your daily correction on a meaningful exposure, especially anything related to:
You do not need to turn this into a checklist that overwhelms supervisors; you simply need a clear mental filter that says, “If the behaviour can reasonably lead to serious harm, I correct it now.”
This tip is only useful if it fits into actual workdays, so here’s a routine that keeps it realistic.
Start the day with one leadership decision that sets your mindset: today I will not walk past risk.
Then, during your first walkthrough, you do two things at the same time: you look for one unsafe behaviour worth correcting, and you look for one control worth praising because it reinforces the standard in a positive way. When you do that consistently, crews stop seeing you as someone who only shows up to criticize, and they start seeing you as someone who keeps the job under control.
If you do not see an obvious unsafe behaviour in the first few minutes, that does not mean you “missed your daily correction.” Instead, you shift to verification, which is just as powerful: ask one worker to show you how they are controlling a critical hazard on the task they are doing right now. That simple request forces the control to become visible, and it also reveals gaps fast because if someone can’t explain the control, they probably can’t execute it reliably.
A few simple prompts help leaders stay focused without turning the walk into a performance:
Those questions keep the conversation tied to risk, not opinion, which is exactly where you want it.
This approach fails when leaders do it sometimes, skip it other times, and then get strict at random, because inconsistency creates confusion and resentment. Crews end up guessing what matters, and they quickly learn that safety enforcement depends on mood, not hazard.
“No exceptions” does not mean you treat every situation identically, and it does not mean you ignore context; it means you do not allow known exposure to continue once you see it. If production pressure is high, that is exactly when this matters most, because pressure is when shortcuts show up, and pressure is when workers need clear leadership to keep the job from drifting into risk.
Most conflict around safety corrections comes from two things: surprise and shame. If you remove surprise by making your approach predictable, and you remove shame by keeping corrections factual and respectful, most workers will accept it, even if they grumble a little in the moment.
You can remove surprise by telling the crew up front what you will be doing, and why, in plain language that makes sense to working people:
“I’m going to correct unsafe behaviours in the moment, every day, because small shortcuts turn into serious injuries. If I stop you, it’s not personal; it’s about the hazard and the control. We’ll fix it and move on.”
You remove shame by correcting behaviour, not character. You avoid labels like careless, lazy, or reckless, and you stick to what you saw and what it can cause. People can argue about your opinion, but they can’t argue with a hazard that is clearly in front of them, especially when you connect it to a realistic outcome.
Most companies don’t struggle because they don’t care. They struggle because they don’t have a consistent field-control method that supervisors can apply under pressure, and they don’t have a clear set of critical controls that leaders are expected to verify in the field.
Calgary Safety Consultants can help you build a practical system that turns leadership behaviour into a real control, not just a message. We can support you with supervisor coaching that improves in-the-moment corrections, safety leadership training that focuses on real field conversations, hazard assessment upgrades so plans match the actual work, and verification tools that create credible due diligence evidence by showing that controls were implemented, checked, corrected, and followed through.
If you are working toward COR/SECOR or you simply want your OH&S program to function better in real operations, we can help you tighten the gap between paper and practice so that what’s written is actually what’s done.
To get support, visit https://calgarysafetyconsultants.ca and reach out. We’ll keep it practical, aligned with Canadian OH&S expectations, and designed for the way work really happens.
If your team is following your behaviour—not the safety policy—then your leadership is the real procedure, whether you meant it that way or not.
You do not have to correct everything to change culture, but you do have to correct something, every day, and you have to do it immediately and consistently. That single habit quietly rewires what your crew believes is normal, and once “normal” becomes safe, your policies stop being background noise and start becoming real standards that people actually follow.
Connect with us here and let us help you improve your OH&S practices.
https://www.alberta.ca/occupational-health-safety
https://www.alberta.ca/ohs-act-regulation-code
https://www.alberta.ca/occupational-health-and-safety-code
https://search-ohs-laws.alberta.ca/
https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/hsprograms/hazard/hierarchy_controls.html
https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/hsprograms/safety_program.html
https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/hsprograms/communication.html
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hierarchy-of-controls/about/index.html
It means the real standard on a jobsite is what leaders consistently correct or allow, especially under pressure. Policies matter, but day-to-day leadership behaviour teaches crews what is actually “normal” and acceptable.
Because tolerance becomes permission. Small shortcuts spread quickly, create drift from the standard, and can normalize exposure until a serious incident occurs.
It’s a simple leadership habit: correct one unsafe behaviour immediately every day, with no exceptions. This reinforces the real standard in the field and interrupts drift before it becomes routine.
Calgary Safety Consultants is here to help you ensure compliance, enhance safety, and streamline your OH&S program. Don’t wait—fill out the form, and we’ll connect with you to discuss how we can support your business. Let’s get started!
Calgary Safety Consultants delivers game-changing COR Audits and OH&S consulting designed to keep your business safe, compliant, and accident-free. With 30+ years of expertise in high-risk industries like oil & gas, construction, and manufacturing, we understand the unique challenges you face. We offer tailored safety solutions that not only meet regulatory standards but also reduce operational risks and protect your workforce. From conducting thorough safety audits to implementing comprehensive safety management systems, we ensure your team is fully supported. Our hands-on, collaborative approach means we're with you every step of the way, helping you achieve a safer, more efficient workplace. Let us handle the heavy lifting so your team stays protected, and your business thrives!
