4 ms·

This is unworkable. You can't penalize a company because their employees did not follow the safety guidelines they promised they would or are legally obliged to

This is unworkable. You can't penalize a company because their employees did not follow the safety guidelines they promised they would or are legally obliged to follow. Especially when a large number of workers are self employed. You can send them bankrupt with a penalty, but then have to support the disabled worker with social security and health care.

Qwertious 3y ago
>This is unworkable. You can't penalize a company because their employees did not follow the safety guidelines they promised they would or are legally obliged to follow. If companies can't be penalized for that, then they'll pull a walmart and "forbid" their workers from taking shortcuts and then set quotas that are impossible to complete without said shortcuts. If workers don't follow safety guidelines once, there's a simple solution: warning/firing them. If workers don't follow safety guidelines constantly, then the company is complicit in it.
pjscott 3y ago
> This is unworkable. You can't penalize a company because their employees did not follow the safety guidelines they promised they would or are legally obliged to follow. One of life's more specific amusements is describing a system that's been in widespread successful use since for over a century – and then having someone confidently say that it's unworkable. It's called "no-fault worker's compensation", and you can read more about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers%27_compensation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers%27_compensation Australia already has these laws on the books! They just, apparently, didn't set a high enough price on silicosis. > Especially when a large number of workers are self employed. You can send them bankrupt with a penalty, but then have to support the disabled worker with social security and health care. Rules vary by state and I haven't looked them all up, but New South Wales has a remedy for this: self-employed workers in fields like construction are also required to provide worker's comp for themselves – and to make sure the money is actually there when needed, they're required to carry insurance.

Qwertious 3y ago

>This is unworkable. You can't penalize a company because their employees did not follow the safety guidelines they promised they would or are legally obliged to follow. If companies can't be penalized for that, then they'll pull a walmart and "forbid" their workers from taking shortcuts and then set quotas that are impossible to complete without said shortcuts. If workers don't follow safety guidelines once, there's a simple solution: warning/firing them. If workers don't follow safety guidelines constantly, then the company is complicit in it.

pjscott 3y ago

> This is unworkable. You can't penalize a company because their employees did not follow the safety guidelines they promised they would or are legally obliged to follow. One of life's more specific amusements is describing a system that's been in widespread successful use since for over a century – and then having someone confidently say that it's unworkable. It's called "no-fault worker's compensation", and you can read more about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers%27_compensation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers%27_compensation Australia already has these laws on the books! They just, apparently, didn't set a high enough price on silicosis. > Especially when a large number of workers are self employed. You can send them bankrupt with a penalty, but then have to support the disabled worker with social security and health care. Rules vary by state and I haven't looked them all up, but New South Wales has a remedy for this: self-employed workers in fields like construction are also required to provide worker's comp for themselves – and to make sure the money is actually there when needed, they're required to carry insurance.