A lineman’s work was relatively straightforward in the early days of our trade: We built power lines with wire and poles, making sure the big end of each pole went into the ground first. Now, as I begin my 35th year in electric distribution, the line crew work environment is rapidly evolving. An especially concerning change is the uptick in hostile threats and violent acts perpetrated against utility workers in the field. Recognizing and adapting to this change is critical to the well-being of our frontline workforce. In CPL 02-01-058, “Enforcement Procedures and Scheduling for Occupational Exposure to Workplace Violence,” OSHA provides the following definition of “workplace violence,” adopted from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health: “Violent acts (including physical assaults and threats of assaults) directed toward persons at work or on duty.” The directive also reiterates that a hazard is “a workplace condition or practice to which employees are exposed, creating the potential for death or serious physical harm to employees” (see www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/directives/CPL_02-01-058.pdf). OSHA addresses workplace violence through its General Duty Clause, which requires employers to provide their employees with a workplace free from recognized hazards. Given the increase in animosity toward our nation’s frontline workers and the fact that OSHA standards merely set minimum safety and health requirements, now is the time for our industry to establish best practices that shield workers from threats and violence in the field. January 2026 Incident Winter Storm Fern struck Middle Tennessee in late January 2026, knocking out power to more than 225,000 households. On February 3, as an eight-member mutual-assistance line crew worked to replace a broken pole in the area, an angry utility customer approached them in the right-of-way. The customer walked up to a bucket truck and opened one of its doors, first cursing at the crew members inside, then stating, “I know what I’m going to do.” After walking back to his house, the customer proceeded to fire multiple gunshots. Crew members took cover behind their trucks and equipment and immediately called 911. When police arrived, they found the customer armed with a 9-millimeter handgun. Officers secured the firearm and arrested the man, who later admitted in his statement that he was angry because he believed crew members had driven through his yard, creating ruts in the ground, and disconnected electrical service to his home. He also stated that he returned to his house after the verbal confrontation for what he described as “gunpowder therapy.” Eventually, the customer was charged with eight counts of aggravated assault. Abatement Options This incident is one of three similar events that have occurred in Middle Tennessee over the past year. Line crews were involved in each case, suggesting that we must prioritize the reevaluation of field violence risks and our organization’s mitigation tactics, with particular attention given to lone workers operating at night. As you conduct your reevaluation, consider adopting the following abatement methods.

• Implement two-person crews to mitigate lone-worker risk.
• Utilize personal alarm systems and security devices, such as panic buttons, hand-held alarms and noise devices.
• Establish relationships with local law enforcement agencies. Immediately alert them to any threats of violence.
• Where risk is anticipated, confirm and document service availability for cellular phones and radio channels. This is especially critical in rural areas.
• Continually train employees in the recognition and deescalation of verbal abuse as well as the appropriate steps to take if deescalation tactics are ineffective.

Conclusion Our industry has come a long way since Thomas Edison introduced the light bulb nearly 150 years ago. Addressing the risk of field violence is an imperative next step in our evolution. While complacency is a natural biological function, we must acknowledge the changing times and keep pace with them – which requires us to periodically review our policies and procedures, making any needed adjustments to align with current industry regulations and best practices. Doing so will aid in safeguarding employees while also shielding employers from potential legal action. About the Author: Doyle Totty, CLCP, CUSP, is a U.S. Navy veteran and utility safety professional with more than three decades of experience in electric utility operations, storm response and safety leadership. He currently serves as safety director for Tennessee-based Dickson Electric System. Totty previously spent 22 years with Meriwether Lewis Electric Cooperative in engineering, operations and safety before retiring in 2012. After retirement, he supported storm restoration efforts and later served as a general foreman with Davis H. Elliot.

In this episode, we dive deep into David McPeak’s article, “250 Years of Safety,” featured in the July 10th, 2026 issue of Incident Prevention magazine. We explore the staggering evolution of workplace safety, starting from the 1890s when electrical line workers faced a nearly 50% on-the-job mortality rate. Discover how financial liabilities, worker’s compensation laws, and the establishment of OSHA in 1970 transformed corporate accountability and birthed the modern safety data revolution. Finally, we discuss the shift from physical safety nets to managing cognitive overload, treating near-misses as “free tuition,” and the new frontier of protecting the worker’s mind, body, and spirit. Don’t miss the details on David McPeak’s upcoming September 9th, 2026 frontline webinar at the end of the episode! Read the article by David McPeak here: https://incident-prevention.com/blog/250-years-of-safety/ Key Takeaways

• The Deadliest Era: The 40-year span from the 1890s to the 1930s was the deadliest era for utility trades, with a roughly 50% fatality rate for electrical line workers due to uninsulated high voltage contact, falls, and a complete lack of specialized protective equipment.

• Financial Accountability Sparked Change: Early corporate safety improvements weren’t driven by a moral awakening, but by shifting legal landscapes. The introduction of worker’s compensation laws established a no-fault system, turning workplace injuries into massive financial liabilities that forced companies to track and stop incidents.

• Failing Safely: Modern safety embraces the concept of “failing safely” because human error is normal and cannot be trained out of existence. Instead of relying on lagging indicators, organizations use proactive tools like High Energy Control Assessments and view near-misses as “free tuition” to improve systems without anyone getting hurt.

• The New Frontier is Cognitive Load: Safety focus is expanding beyond physical gear like harnesses and trench boxes to address the “whole person”. Organizations are realizing that cognitive overload, burnout, and mental health crises pose significant risks on highly complex, modern job sites.

Questions and Answers

• Question: What was a major catalyst that forced companies to transition out of the deadly, unregulated era of utility work?

  • Answer: The transition was largely driven by legal and financial shifts. In the 1910s and 1920s, unionization and the introduction of worker’s compensation established a no-fault system, meaning employers had to carry insurance that paid out for injuries. This financial liability forced management to understand and prevent incidents to stop their insurance premiums from skyrocketing.

• Question: How has the perception of a “near miss” evolved in modern safety culture?

  • Answer: Historically, workers would sweep near-misses under the rug out of fear of getting fired. Today, sophisticated tracking software allows organizations to view a near-miss as “free tuition”. It is seen as a successful instance where the safety net held, allowing the organization to learn and reinforce the system without anyone having to bleed for the lesson.

#WorkplaceSafety #IncidentPrevention #UtilityWork #SafetyCulture #MentalHealthInSafety