Comment by gnfargbl
2 years ago
The logic here is that if an industry can only be made safe with strict PPE standards, but the market dynamics make it difficult to ensure compliance with those standards, then it is OK to ban the industry.
That seems a pretty concerning stance for small businesses. What's next? Ban microbreweries because they don't properly manage the risks of CO2 asphyxiation? Ban small-shop mechanics because they routinely get brake fluid on their hands?
Well-enforced safety regulations are a good thing for everyone. Banning small businesses because regulating them is hard seems... economically undesirable.
They’re not banning businesses. They’re banning a product which is causing deaths. Switch to a alternate product. It’s the same in your analogy of banning a toxic brake fluid.
Nope, the product does not cause death, at least not according to this article. It is production that causes severe and potentially deadly illness.
And not because the production process inherently deadly, but because of rampant non-compliance with safety standards.
The article does not explain why an obvious solution: certification and severe (severe!) fines for non-compliance would not work. Probably a political issue.
I've noticed in the article that trade unions applauded the ban, and I wonder why.
severe (severe!) fines
Unless you can pierce the corporate veil or somehow make owners criminally liable for low safety standards, levelling huge fines at small companies is meaningless, as the company will just end up declaring bankruptcy and the workers will just get hired by the next company over, with equally low standards.
> article. It is production that causes severe and potentially deadly illness.
No. It is the cutting of the product (often on-site at the residence) to fit the kitchen or bathroom that causes silica dust. Workers not wearing mask protection and not using proper ventilation fans and vacuums breathe in the dust.
The odd thing is silica dust is also present in natural stones like quartz (very popular in America right now). I don’t understand how this legislation will help since it only bans engineered stone.
3 replies →
It’s like banning chemical products because they are causing death if not handled properly. We would not have an industrialised world if we went that way.
We have for example banned CFCs which are entirely harmless if used properly in properly and fully maintained equipment with proper capturing at end of lifetime...
That did not happen, so we banned them. I see no reason that we could not replace engineered stone with multiple other things.
2 replies →
We would also have a much sicker world if we didnt ban things. For better or for worse (often for worse in my opinion) Australia is king of banning things and treating its citizens as children. However when it comes to workplace safety I tend to be in favour because workers often get pressured into unsafe behaviour by time or by bosses.
On the contrary - don’t you think the message this sends will make things better re other chemical products? Either the manufacturers themselves will find better versions of dangerous chemicals or the users will wake up.
> They’re banning a product which is causing deaths
According to the link in the grandparent comment, I think it was the production process that they didn't want the expense of enforcing safety standards on. Not the end product itself. Hence the comment about banning an industry.
Industrial manslaughter laws are a fine incentive to correctly manage the risks of CO₂ asphyxiation, because it is immediately apparent when your worker has been asphyxiated and the proximal cause is readily determined.
Silicosis takes years to appear so the proximal link is too weak for post facto punishment to have much deterrent effect. It is much more like asbestos in this way, which can also be safely handled but has also been banned.
All things in context. In this case, it’s a luxury good with a ready alternative.
The cause for poor health-and-safety conduct appears to be cultural, rather than "market dynamics"
it is market dynamics -- PPE is too expensive, and they won't do it.
[flagged]