10
Loading video...
By Allison Anderson
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
I spent years working in the mines before I started a business selling workwear to the people who work in them.
More than 600,000 people are employed in mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction in the United States, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
I was one of them. I know what it feels like to be handed a uniform that meets the standard on paper and fails you on the ground. I know what it feels like to wear something that was never designed for your body.
Read More on Leadership Insights
I also know the sensation of the fabric trapping heat against your skin. I certainly know what it feels like to have a sleeve caught on equipment because the fit was wrong.
...
Safety Beyond Compliance
Safety is not just a policy. It is a decision companies make when they choose what to buy and put on their workers' backs.
Too many companies treat that decision as a box to tick. They buy the cheapest garment that appears to meet the standard, and they assume the job is done.
It is not done. A high-visibility shirt can carry reflective tape and still be unsafe if the tape is decorative rather than certified.
The ANSI/ISEA 107-2020 standard sets the performance requirements for high-visibility apparel, including the retroreflective material and its placement.
A garment that looks like it meets the standard is not the same as a garment that does. DLA PIPER reports that OSHA's proposed heat rule recognizes this, with an initial heat trigger at 80°F (26.7°C) that requires employers to provide water, rest areas, and acclimatization.
The standard tells you what a garment must do. It does not tell you whether the garment is right for the person wearing it.
The consequences are not abstract. Workers in uncomfortable gear can become distracted, struggle through demanding shifts, and lose confidence that their employer takes their safety seriously.
Some leave jobs because the uniform makes an already difficult role harder. I have seen it from the inside, and I see it now from the other side of the counter.
For employers, those decisions carry costs of their own. Losing experienced workers means recruiting and training replacements.
Unsuitable clothing affects comfort, concentration, and the smooth running of daily operations. Some companies change uniform policies overnight. That can create supply shortages, stock problems, and unnecessary disruption.
What looks like a saving on a purchasing spreadsheet can create costs elsewhere in the business, while workers bear the immediate consequences.
But these problems go beyond rushed purchasing decisions. They also stem from a tendency to treat workwear as a one-size-fits-all solution, regardless of the conditions or the people wearing it.
Workwear Must Fit the Worker
A mine in the high desert has different needs from one in a cold climate, just as surface crews face different conditions from workers underground.
Yet the problem is even more pronounced for women, who are often expected to make do with workwear designed for men.
I experienced this firsthand, having to wear men's workwear simply relabeled in women's sizes. Poorly fitting clothing can restrict movement or hang loose enough to snag on equipment, creating risks that proper design could help prevent.
When companies fail to account for both working conditions and the people wearing the gear, they are prioritizing convenience over protection. Treating everyone the same because it makes procurement simpler is not safety. It is administration.
The question should not be whether the gear meets the standard on paper, but whether it works for the person wearing it through a 12-hour shift.
That means considering comfort, fit, climate, and the demands of the job, while ensuring the people making purchasing decisions understand the difference between certified protective materials and products that merely look compliant.
Above all, it means treating workers as people to protect, not line items in a budget.
The True Cost of Cheap Workwear
The real cost of workwear is not just the purchase price. A cheap garment wears out quickly. It can fail inspection or even contribute to workers leaving their jobs.
In the wrong environment, it can also cause a hazard. Loose fabric may get caught on machinery. It can trap heat and restrict movement.
In the worst cases, it can lead to an accident. Over time, cheap gear may cost a company more than better equipment would have cost at the start. Rushed changes can add more pressure. They bring emergency orders, shortages, and repeated replacements.
This industry depends on people doing physically demanding work. Much of it is hazardous. The decisions behind the gear matter.
Procurement teams are often judged on how little they spend. When that is the measure, comfort, fit, and long-term performance become secondary. That is a false economy.
Protective apparel is part of the working environment. Investing in the right gear means investing in people. It means investing in productivity.
It means investing in the continuity that keeps an operation running. Quality costs more up front. It can cost less over time.
Companies buying safety gear this year should ask one question before they sign the order. Does this protect the person who will wear it? Or does it protect the company from a compliance check?
If the answer is the second one, the problem is not solved. It has just been moved onto the worker's back.
A company can meet the standard on paper and still fail the worker wearing the uniform. Until businesses recognize that difference, they are not taking safety seriously enough.
Allison Anderson is the co-owner of Princess and a Redneck, a custom workwear and promotional products shop in Elko, Nevada; the views expressed in this article are her own.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines