4 ms·
It's protecting the commons. As an individual it might make sense for me to opt out of those regulations because I can get a job easier or command a higher wage
by lovich 9y ago
It's protecting the commons. As an individual it might make sense for me to opt out of those regulations because I can get a job easier or command a higher wage. This only works if most people follow the regulations. The problem is when companies make opting out a de facto part of the deal and then individuals are no longer getting a benefit from their choices but are forced into it
- chrisseaton 9y agoYes I think I'd agree in practice. I was really replying to the 'nothing wrong with it' assertion. I think there is something fundamentally wrong with it and we should acknowledge we're taking away people's freedom, but it's probably an acceptable trade-off in practice.
- gech 9y agoWell we'll place you on the defeatist side. Please stand down then when the rest of us try to argue for progress by enshrining new rights and not tossing them up in the air.
- chrisseaton 9y agoNo I'm the optimist! I hope people can be left to work out their own arrangements amicably. But accept we aren't there yet so support a little nudge here and there. You're the defeatist - assuming they can't and stepping in to force them to do it your way instead.
- HarryHirsch 9y agoWork out own arrangements indeed. That's what the infuriating "Right-to-Know" laws are for. You have as an employee the right to know about the hazards of the chemicals you are working with. But you do not have a right to proper safety equipment or training. It's enshrining a race to the bottom that does nothing to improve workplace safety.