Work accidents (WA) are outcomes of the ways societies produce the conditions for their existence and become social objects by means of theoretical-practical constructions. Conceptions based on personal or psychological factors have been presented to blame workers for WA. We have investigated these conceptions in the workers' discursive practices in an attempt to identify interpretative repertoires and their rhetoric and argumentative features. We conducted a case study at a metallurgic company. It was based on observations, informal conversations, evaluations of document, and interviews involving twenty workers. A pervasive presence of the Heinrich's Dominoes Theory was observed in the patterns of understanding WA, and the predominance of explanations for unsafe acts supported by naturalization of risks and by institutionalized transmission practices. Nevertheless, the discursive construction of the WA occurs in a dilemmatic way. We found contradictions among the different interpretative repertoires, as well as the presence of denaturalizing events; both of them produce semantic ruptures and manifestations of resistance. Thus, this research revealed polyssemic and rhetoric features of the discursive practices that attribute meanings to WA.
accident analysis; unsafe act; blaming; discourse; social psychology