5 ms·

Probably also more lax in TX than CA

by chrisan 6y ago

lolsal 6y ago
What makes you think this?
- rconti 6y ago
  Part of the state's business model is bragging about businesses "fleeing" high-tax, high-regulation states like CA. Also, there was a thread a few days back about OSHA requirements; the Federal government sets minimum standards but each state's OSHA is free to set higher standard on top of that. There is a line of thinking (at least, among Tesla apologists) that CalOSHA is "the reason" that Tesla has the "most reported safety incidents" of auto mfgrs.
pvarangot 6y ago
Not a chance, I worked with similarly regulated providers in the US.
- xur17 6y ago
  CA is more lax than TX? I find that surprising.
  - snowwrestler 6y ago
    I think he said TX is not more lax than CA, which doesn't mean CA is more lax either. It's possible their safety regimes are simply similar. I think a lot of workplace safety rolls up to the feds anyway, so it wouldn't matter which state you choose.
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    https://workinjurysource.com/workplace-injury-statistics-2019/ https://workinjurysource.com/workplace-injury-statistics-201... > States with Non-Fatal Workplace Illness and Injury Rates Above the National Average: > California > States with Non-Fatal Workplace Illness and Injury Rates Below the National Average: > Texas It's completely possible that Texas is less adversarial/bureaucratic or similar than California, but whatever they're doing is working. Though it could be cultural differences. Government regulations are often half good best practices and half harmful backwards nonsense. A culture that only calls OSHA for not following best practices even after having it pointed out and not for not implementing backwards nonsense could pretty easily end up with a better safety record than one that prioritizes strict compliance over actual safety.
    - jcranmer 6y ago
      That statistic is nearly completely useless for comparison. For starters, it's measuring non-fatal illnesses. If your regulatory regime is converting otherwise fatal accidents to non-fatal ones, then you're going to have higher rates despite being safer. (Historically, this has happened: the introduction of helmets in WW1 caused head injury rates to go up... because people who otherwise died now lived with a head injury instead). Another point is that states have quite different workplace characteristics, so the baseline risks are going to be quite different. Working in a coal mine is going to be an inherently more dangerous job than being a paper-pusher in an office tower. Unsurprisingly, West Virginia (which has a lot more of the former than the latter) is in the above-average list and New York (which has the reverse) is in the below-average list. Finally... there's no mention of the degree of difference at all.
      - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
        > For starters, it's measuring non-fatal illnesses. This actually helps to mitigate your other point, because all types of industries can have non-fatal injuries from things like overexertion or slips on wet floors but fatal injuries are dominated by dangerous industries like mining, transportation and agriculture that differ by state. The fatal injury rate between states is quite incomparable in particular because motor vehicle accidents are the leading cause of death among working-aged people, and the rate will be higher in states that are more spread out because workers in all industries there log more vehicle miles for work (and at higher average speeds). > Finally... there's no mention of the degree of difference at all. Texas can't be worse if it's better.

Probably also more lax in TX than CA

lolsal 6y ago

What makes you think this?

rconti 6y ago
Part of the state's business model is bragging about businesses "fleeing" high-tax, high-regulation states like CA. Also, there was a thread a few days back about OSHA requirements; the Federal government sets minimum standards but each state's OSHA is free to set higher standard on top of that. There is a line of thinking (at least, among Tesla apologists) that CalOSHA is "the reason" that Tesla has the "most reported safety incidents" of auto mfgrs.

pvarangot 6y ago

Not a chance, I worked with similarly regulated providers in the US.

xur17 6y ago
CA is more lax than TX? I find that surprising.
- snowwrestler 6y ago
  I think he said TX is not more lax than CA, which doesn't mean CA is more lax either. It's possible their safety regimes are simply similar. I think a lot of workplace safety rolls up to the feds anyway, so it wouldn't matter which state you choose.
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  https://workinjurysource.com/workplace-injury-statistics-2019/ https://workinjurysource.com/workplace-injury-statistics-201... > States with Non-Fatal Workplace Illness and Injury Rates Above the National Average: > California > States with Non-Fatal Workplace Illness and Injury Rates Below the National Average: > Texas It's completely possible that Texas is less adversarial/bureaucratic or similar than California, but whatever they're doing is working. Though it could be cultural differences. Government regulations are often half good best practices and half harmful backwards nonsense. A culture that only calls OSHA for not following best practices even after having it pointed out and not for not implementing backwards nonsense could pretty easily end up with a better safety record than one that prioritizes strict compliance over actual safety.
  - jcranmer 6y ago
    That statistic is nearly completely useless for comparison. For starters, it's measuring non-fatal illnesses. If your regulatory regime is converting otherwise fatal accidents to non-fatal ones, then you're going to have higher rates despite being safer. (Historically, this has happened: the introduction of helmets in WW1 caused head injury rates to go up... because people who otherwise died now lived with a head injury instead). Another point is that states have quite different workplace characteristics, so the baseline risks are going to be quite different. Working in a coal mine is going to be an inherently more dangerous job than being a paper-pusher in an office tower. Unsurprisingly, West Virginia (which has a lot more of the former than the latter) is in the above-average list and New York (which has the reverse) is in the below-average list. Finally... there's no mention of the degree of difference at all.
    - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
      > For starters, it's measuring non-fatal illnesses. This actually helps to mitigate your other point, because all types of industries can have non-fatal injuries from things like overexertion or slips on wet floors but fatal injuries are dominated by dangerous industries like mining, transportation and agriculture that differ by state. The fatal injury rate between states is quite incomparable in particular because motor vehicle accidents are the leading cause of death among working-aged people, and the rate will be higher in states that are more spread out because workers in all industries there log more vehicle miles for work (and at higher average speeds). > Finally... there's no mention of the degree of difference at all. Texas can't be worse if it's better.