Hand injuries remain one of the most persistent risks across mining and heavy industry, despite mature safety systems and clear PPE policies. This paradox highlights a deeper issue: glove use is not simply a rule-compliance problem — it is a performance trade-off decision made repeatedly throughout the workday. Unlike most PPE, gloves directly intervene in task execution. Workers continually and often subconsciously re-evaluate whether the protective benefit outweighs perceived costs such as reduced dexterity, heat, grip interference, and slower task completion. When protection is experienced as a performance penalty, non-use can become a rational and identity-reinforcing choice. Drawing on the Theory of Planned Behaviour (Ajzen, 1991), this presentation reframes glove compliance through four behavioural drivers: attitudes (risk versus immediate discomfort), subjective norms (crew and supervisor modelling), perceived behavioural control (ability to perform tasks effectively while gloved), and habit formation. Identity and professional self-concept are examined as powerful but under-recognised influences on PPE decisions. The session will identify six common behavioural barriers to glove use in mining environments — including task interference, optimism bias, friction costs, and policy mismatch — and contrast them with evidence-based motivators such as task-fit design, strong local norms, autonomy in selection, and identity-based messaging. Attendees will be introduced to a practical behavioural diagnosis checklist and a Good/Better/Best glove framework that aligns protection levels with task demands. The central thesis is clear: sustainable hand protection compliance is achieved not by intensifying enforcement, but by reducing performance penalties, engineering better defaults, and aligning glove programs with how skilled workers actually make decisions in high-risk environments.