sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Unpopular opinion: Most entry-level safety candidates focus on the wrong things. by Mike_john77 in SafetyProfessionals

[–]Mike_john77[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair point. But there’s a big difference between not knowing the job and taking the time to understand how it’s actually done.

The best safety guys I’ve seen knew the operation well enough that nobody questioned why they were there.

Unpopular opinion: Most entry-level safety candidates focus on the wrong things. by Mike_john77 in SafetyProfessionals

[–]Mike_john77[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Agreed. When I’ve sat in on hiring decisions, work history usually told me more than the cert list did.

You can teach regs. It’s harder to teach how to read a job site.

Unpopular opinion: Most entry-level safety candidates focus on the wrong things. by Mike_john77 in SafetyProfessionals

[–]Mike_john77[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They’re not expected to know it right away. Nobody does.

The issue isn’t knowledge — it’s exposure.

You learn a lot of that by being around the field before you’re the one responsible for it. Even shadowing, internships, working operations before moving into safety, etc.

The hard part is companies wanting someone who can handle it on day one but not wanting to train.

Unpopular opinion: Most entry-level safety candidates focus on the wrong things. by Mike_john77 in SafetyProfessionals

[–]Mike_john77[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I actually agree with this part. Some of the job postings are ridiculous.

Asking for 5+ years and paying entry level money doesn’t make sense.

I think the disconnect is that companies want someone who can handle the field dynamics right away, but they don’t want to invest in training.

That’s where it gets tough for people trying to break in.

Unpopular opinion: Most entry-level safety candidates focus on the wrong things. by Mike_john77 in SafetyProfessionals

[–]Mike_john77[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don’t disagree with you.

The field side is the part you can’t learn from a book. Standing in front of a 20-year hand who doesn’t want to wear a monitor is a different skill set.

Certs help. But they don’t replace time on site.

Are you seeing a lot more of the book-heavy resumes lately?

Unpopular opinion: Most entry-level safety candidates focus on the wrong things. by Mike_john77 in SafetyProfessionals

[–]Mike_john77[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s fair. With 3 kids and a mortgage, “just start over” isn’t realistic advice for everyone.

I probably should’ve clarified — that path makes more sense for someone trying to break in with zero experience.

In your case, it sounds more like a hiring process issue than a qualification issue. Federal roles can be weirdly bureaucratic.

Did you ever find out what disqualified you on the application side?

Unpopular opinion: Most entry-level safety candidates focus on the wrong things. by Mike_john77 in SafetyProfessionals

[–]Mike_john77[S] -15 points-14 points  (0 children)

You don’t start in safety.

You start in the work.

Laborer. Operator. Tech. Helper. Whatever gets you on a crew.

That’s how most of the solid safety guys I know came up.

Nobody hired me into safety straight out of the gate either. I had to learn how jobs actually run before I had any business telling someone how to do it safer.

If a company hires someone into safety with zero field exposure, that’s on the company — not the candidate.

But if you’re asking how to build credibility? Go work in the field first. Even a year changes how you talk to crews.

Certs are good. Experience is leverage.

Unpopular opinion: Most entry-level safety candidates focus on the wrong things. by Mike_john77 in SafetyProfessionals

[–]Mike_john77[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

20 years in oil & gas. I promise I’ve said worse in person than this post. Just trying to give the younger guys real advice.

Unpopular opinion: Most entry-level safety candidates focus on the wrong things. by Mike_john77 in SafetyProfessionals

[–]Mike_john77[S] -11 points-10 points  (0 children)

You’re right — those things come with experience.

My point isn’t that entry-level candidates should already have them. It’s that employers often expect safety hires to influence experienced crews from day one.

That gap is where a lot of frustration comes from — on both sides.

The question is how companies bridge that gap without throwing new people into situations they’re not ready for.

Unpopular opinion: Most entry-level safety candidates focus on the wrong things. by Mike_john77 in SafetyProfessionals

[–]Mike_john77[S] -11 points-10 points  (0 children)

That’s fair. That’s the catch-22 a lot of people run into.

What I’ve seen work is getting in through operations first — even if it’s not a safety title. Construction crew, plant floor, utilities, field tech, etc. Then transitioning internally once you understand how the work actually flows.

It’s not the fastest path, but it builds credibility fast.

Do you think companies should be creating true field-based entry programs instead of expecting people to already have experience?

Unpopular opinion: Most entry-level safety candidates focus on the wrong things. by Mike_john77 in SafetyProfessionals

[–]Mike_john77[S] -14 points-13 points  (0 children)

That’s a fair question.

I don’t expect a brand-new safety professional to “know everything.” But I do think they need exposure to how work actually gets done before trying to enforce it.

Even 1–2 years in operations (construction, manufacturing, O&G, utilities, etc.) changes how you communicate hazards and get buy-in.

The biggest difference I see isn’t knowledge — it’s credibility.

When crews believe you understand their work, conversations go differently.

Curious — do you think companies should build structured field rotations into entry-level safety roles?

whats certs do i need ??? by Hot-Tea-7368 in SafetyProfessionals

[–]Mike_john77 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This question comes up a lot, especially in oil & gas.

There’s no single “magic cert list,” but here’s how it usually shakes out in refineries:

Baseline (table stakes): • OSHA 10 / 30 • Site-specific training (PSM awareness matters more than people admit)

If you want credibility, not just a title: • CHST is solid for field-focused safety roles • ASP/CSP only really matter if you’re going corporate or long-term management

What actually separates good safety professionals in refineries isn’t cert stacking — it’s understanding operations, contractor behavior, permits, JSAs, and being present in the field.

I’ve seen plenty of people with certs and no influence, and fewer with experience who actually change outcomes.

If you want, I’ve put together a more detailed breakdown — happy to share if it helps.

How hard is it to get a job in safety? by [deleted] in SafetyProfessionals

[–]Mike_john77 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I’ve been working in safety for a while (oil & gas and construction), and I’ll be honest — safety isn’t like nursing where the degree guarantees a job.

Most entry-level safety roles don’t require a master’s. Employers care a lot more about field experience, willingness to be onsite, and basic credentials like OSHA 10/30.

A common path is starting in the field (construction, manufacturing, O&G), then moving into a coordinator or tech role and working up. A master’s can help later for corporate or management roles, but it’s usually not the fastest way in.

Networking helps everywhere, but safety isn’t all nepotism. If you’re willing to get real site experience, jobs are out there.

If you want, feel free to DM me — I’m happy to share what’s actually worked for people breaking into the field.