Comment by kelnos
2 years ago
I mean, if we can't incentivize doing the right thing by teaching people that they'll die of a respiratory disease in their 30s if they don't wear their PPE, then honestly, that's life. If people choose to do their job in a way that gives them high risk of bad health outcomes, that's on them.
Certainly if workers are being coerced into not doing the right thing, that's a problem, and employers need to be fined into oblivion if they pull that crap.
If it's uncomfortable or takes longer to do it safely, that cost should be passed on to the person paying for the work.
You implicitly lay responsibility on the worker first, then on the employer, then on the customer.
Perhaps if the order of responsibility were reversed, it would lead to better outcomes.
It would be ridiculous to have any responsibility on the customer.
The only feasible order is government, employer, then worker. The government is tasked with the making the rules and surprise inspections, and the rest follows from there.
Well, the customer also has a lot of power. They can decide to hire a company (if available of course) that encourages/forces their workers to use PPE, even if it's a little more expensive (and maybe also takes longer) instead of just going for the lowest bidder...
5 replies →