4 ms·

> Sensible rules about dangerous work of course make sense. Roofers should wear harnesses when appropriate, everyone should have ppe. But calling a sixteen year

> Sensible rules about dangerous work of course make sense. Roofers should wear harnesses when appropriate, everyone should have ppe. But calling a sixteen year old construction worker a child laborer is just ignorant. It's a young man working a good job and staying out of trouble. Okay but, FTA: >It also limits employer liability for the injury, illness, or death of a child on the job. Adolescents are almost twice as likely as adults to be injured at work. You’re envisioning Dad bringing Junior to work to help haul off cinderblocks in the back of the family F150, you’re imagining something that isn’t the case. People under 18 are children. They are being endangered while the companies that profit are being protected.

EscapeFromNY 3y ago
[flagged]
- 35997279 3y ago
  The study you linked didn’t control for age.
  - EscapeFromNY 3y ago
    Unless you think 44.5% of contruction workers are under 18, the results are still significant. Do you know of another study that controls for age?
    - 35997279 3y ago
      Sorry, I don’t have any sources that prove your assertion.
      - EscapeFromNY 3y ago
        My source already proves my assertion. It's always disappointing to watch people make up excuses to ignore data when the data tells a story they don't want to hear.
        fzeroracer 3y ago
        Your source does not prove your assertion. You're trying to link two disparate variables, which is chance of injury when inexperienced and chance of injury when young. We objectively know that teenagers tend to get injured more because the whole part of their brain that controls risk-taking behaviors and impulse control quite literally isn't developed yet. So these two are compounding factors that result in teens being injured far more often in dangerous jobs. That said, the fact that you think people are 'making up excuses' when you post wrong data shows you're just trying to push a narrative rather than actually debate.
        EscapeFromNY 3y ago
        It's basic math, no? Teenagers cannot account for 44.5% of injuries if they don't make up 44.5% of the workforce. Do you believe more than 44.5% of the workforce are teenagers? Yes, teenagers are more injury prone, but obviously not 44.5% more, and it isn't obviously more impactful than the effects of an older human body deteriorating with age. If you go to the average hospital, are 44.5% of the patients teenagers?
      - Supermancho 3y ago
        > Sorry, I don’t have any other sources that contribute to the discussion. FTFY
- arrosenberg 3y ago
  The 16 year old is also less likely to tell the bossman to get fucked when he orders his workers to do something dangerous and illegal.
- orwin 3y ago
  Hence why the companions and trade schools existed, and why internship exists in white-collar jobs (because if the new hire destroy the prod DB, it cost way much than a kid dying on the job). Also, one major flaw that the US caught by destroying its trade schools and hiring like qualifications do not matter is that the skill level of your construction workers seems abysmal from my point of view. Only talking about carpentry here, since it's the only trade i witnessed, but if you've worked in carpentry for ten years and don't know how to apply basic math theorems on triangles and draw a plan, you might want to go to a carpentry school. Also: imprecise cuts, cannot use protractors (thus redoing the cuts multiple time) and poor understanding on how weight is distributed.
- version_five 3y ago
  > EDIT: Wow, lots of city boys on HN, who would have guessed! :D I know, it's a little concerning. There are other articles that occasionally get discussed talking about the crisis among young men and whatnot, not having meaningful ways to be part of society and what can we do about it. And then something so simple as work, which obviously comes with tradeoffs, gets immediately dismissed as dangerous or exploitive or anti union or whatever urban sentiments people have. It feels like many would rather try and force young people to conform to some office worker version of life, and if they don't accept that then to drug them or imprison them, or just talk about how ignorant they all are.
  - EscapeFromNY 3y ago
    Yeah. If a 16 year old gets an internship at a soulless tech/advertising company, HN will cheer and celebrate. But if a 16 year old frames a house, it's [flagged] [dead].
vanattab 3y ago
[flagged]
- joebob42 3y ago
  It's a little flippant but I kind of see your point. Everything I did as a kid was more dangerous because I was an uncoordinated idiot with no sense of danger. I'm still mostly better off for having done the stupid things I did. Why does attaching pay make it special? The only aside is that I don't want to end up in a world where substantial fractions of children must work in order to be fed and housed. But if a kid wants to work and someone wants to pay them to, it seems good to me.
  - 35997279 3y ago
    > Why does attaching pay make it special? Incentives. A bouldering gym is incentivized, due to the cost of liability and the impact on their reputation, for every visitor to have a safe experience. If your kid falls and breaks his neck after you paid a gym to help him learn, you’re going to sue. Employers are incentivized to extract as much labor for the least amount of expense. New laws disincentivize safety by reducing liability.
  - lazyasciiart 3y ago
    Attaching pay attached a large amount of coercion: are you willing to give up the future income of this job in order to refuse a bad or dangerous or illegal request? That’s the core argument behind many worker protections. And the idea that children are going to be better at making that decision than they are at deciding whether a cigarette or a special onetime investment opportunity is a good idea is … low evidence.
  - throwaway049 3y ago
    Your nephew's ability to eat or keep a roof over his head is not conditional upon completing the boulder course at a pace set by a foreman, or completing it at all. That's what makes attaching pay to it special.
    - 3y ago
runamok 3y ago
And one is a smokescreen for the other. "Stop treading on me" really just allows special interests to take advantage of people. Similar to how all these calls for lowering taxes on the top 1% is supposedly to support small businesses when most of those don't benefit and neither does it "trickle down". Example: https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/fact-sheet-tax-cuts-dont-boost-small-business-employment https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/fact-shee...

EscapeFromNY 3y ago

[flagged]

35997279 3y ago
The study you linked didn’t control for age.
- EscapeFromNY 3y ago
  Unless you think 44.5% of contruction workers are under 18, the results are still significant. Do you know of another study that controls for age?
  - 35997279 3y ago
    Sorry, I don’t have any sources that prove your assertion.
    - EscapeFromNY 3y ago
      My source already proves my assertion. It's always disappointing to watch people make up excuses to ignore data when the data tells a story they don't want to hear.
      - fzeroracer 3y ago
        Your source does not prove your assertion. You're trying to link two disparate variables, which is chance of injury when inexperienced and chance of injury when young. We objectively know that teenagers tend to get injured more because the whole part of their brain that controls risk-taking behaviors and impulse control quite literally isn't developed yet. So these two are compounding factors that result in teens being injured far more often in dangerous jobs. That said, the fact that you think people are 'making up excuses' when you post wrong data shows you're just trying to push a narrative rather than actually debate.
        EscapeFromNY 3y ago
        It's basic math, no? Teenagers cannot account for 44.5% of injuries if they don't make up 44.5% of the workforce. Do you believe more than 44.5% of the workforce are teenagers? Yes, teenagers are more injury prone, but obviously not 44.5% more, and it isn't obviously more impactful than the effects of an older human body deteriorating with age. If you go to the average hospital, are 44.5% of the patients teenagers?
    - Supermancho 3y ago
      > Sorry, I don’t have any other sources that contribute to the discussion. FTFY
arrosenberg 3y ago
The 16 year old is also less likely to tell the bossman to get fucked when he orders his workers to do something dangerous and illegal.
orwin 3y ago
Hence why the companions and trade schools existed, and why internship exists in white-collar jobs (because if the new hire destroy the prod DB, it cost way much than a kid dying on the job). Also, one major flaw that the US caught by destroying its trade schools and hiring like qualifications do not matter is that the skill level of your construction workers seems abysmal from my point of view. Only talking about carpentry here, since it's the only trade i witnessed, but if you've worked in carpentry for ten years and don't know how to apply basic math theorems on triangles and draw a plan, you might want to go to a carpentry school. Also: imprecise cuts, cannot use protractors (thus redoing the cuts multiple time) and poor understanding on how weight is distributed.
version_five 3y ago
> EDIT: Wow, lots of city boys on HN, who would have guessed! :D I know, it's a little concerning. There are other articles that occasionally get discussed talking about the crisis among young men and whatnot, not having meaningful ways to be part of society and what can we do about it. And then something so simple as work, which obviously comes with tradeoffs, gets immediately dismissed as dangerous or exploitive or anti union or whatever urban sentiments people have. It feels like many would rather try and force young people to conform to some office worker version of life, and if they don't accept that then to drug them or imprison them, or just talk about how ignorant they all are.
- EscapeFromNY 3y ago
  Yeah. If a 16 year old gets an internship at a soulless tech/advertising company, HN will cheer and celebrate. But if a 16 year old frames a house, it's [flagged] [dead].

vanattab 3y ago

[flagged]

joebob42 3y ago
It's a little flippant but I kind of see your point. Everything I did as a kid was more dangerous because I was an uncoordinated idiot with no sense of danger. I'm still mostly better off for having done the stupid things I did. Why does attaching pay make it special? The only aside is that I don't want to end up in a world where substantial fractions of children must work in order to be fed and housed. But if a kid wants to work and someone wants to pay them to, it seems good to me.
- 35997279 3y ago
  > Why does attaching pay make it special? Incentives. A bouldering gym is incentivized, due to the cost of liability and the impact on their reputation, for every visitor to have a safe experience. If your kid falls and breaks his neck after you paid a gym to help him learn, you’re going to sue. Employers are incentivized to extract as much labor for the least amount of expense. New laws disincentivize safety by reducing liability.
- lazyasciiart 3y ago
  Attaching pay attached a large amount of coercion: are you willing to give up the future income of this job in order to refuse a bad or dangerous or illegal request? That’s the core argument behind many worker protections. And the idea that children are going to be better at making that decision than they are at deciding whether a cigarette or a special onetime investment opportunity is a good idea is … low evidence.
- throwaway049 3y ago
  Your nephew's ability to eat or keep a roof over his head is not conditional upon completing the boulder course at a pace set by a foreman, or completing it at all. That's what makes attaching pay to it special.
  - 3y ago

runamok 3y ago

And one is a smokescreen for the other. "Stop treading on me" really just allows special interests to take advantage of people. Similar to how all these calls for lowering taxes on the top 1% is supposedly to support small businesses when most of those don't benefit and neither does it "trickle down". Example: https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/fact-sheet-tax-cuts-dont-boost-small-business-employment https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/fact-shee...