I think it’s an intriguing concept, but it’s more about criticizing the complacency and cargo culting that comes with wide adoption of anything, than proposing a solution, and it strikes me that the “Safety Third” is throwing the baby out with the bath water because they don’t like the fact that corporate is now dominating a discussion that originated with labour.
In my experience in a wide variety of dangerous work, Safety needs to come from the top of a crew. But it needs to be backed by the top of an organization. In pyrotechnics, we practice safety first, and we understand that that means that even most junior guy on the crew is expected to tell anyone up to and including a producer to pound sand if they’re asking them to do something unsafe. But in order for that to happen, you need to have buy-in from all levels of leadership that they will back a decision that was made in the name of safety, even if it turns out to be expensive. Getting cute and calling it “safety third” just strikes me as clickbaity.
Disclaimer: I got my start in the business I’m in hauling fire hose up hill through animal shit in the freezing cold for 14-20 hour days. I have my dirty job creds, and I am really not a fan of Mike Rowe. I think the SWEAT pledge is abhorrent, and is at best misguided, and at worst manifestation of the attitudes that get new workers injured, raped, and killed on the job.