On workplace safety...

[uscitizen]

Try deep frying naked! Now, that's a hoot!

It will keep you active, that is fer sure.

I deep fried some chicken and fries this weekend and the oil splashed on my arm. It didn't even hurt.

I'm conditioned from welding slag.

I am not that tough. I may not scream and dance but it would still hurt.

Slag down the shirt collar is the worst for me. Do the welders jig.

Torching multi layer stuff with rust in the layers is the worst. Are plasma rigs any better on that? I have been thinking of getting one.

 

[American Horse]

When the issue of workplace safety is discussed, do you tend to believe that a vigorous OSHA is what it takes to protect workers? Or, do you believe that workers should be trained and organized to prevent workplace accidents? If it's the latter, do you believe that trade unions should take the yeoman's share of the responsibility, or that the employer should handle this without 'interference' from a government agency?

My point is to ask: if you feel that agencies like OSHA are too intrusive, trade unions are altogether bad, would you still say you are genuinely concerned about workplace safety?

Do you believe that private industry has a sterling track record vis-a-vis worker safety? Would you hold employers responsible for lost time workplace accidents?

My construction site was visited by OSHA only once. When they show up they get your attenton. Any old electrical cords with tape patches are a violation. Having an unsafe ladder on site even if it is not being used is a violation. On the day I met OSHA I was presented with a list of violations which produced a $2,000 "fine". If I could remedy all the volations by the end of that day, when the inspecter scheduled a return, the fine would be knocked down to $200.

I more or less happily paid the two hundred. To me it was a really valuable learning experience. I would imagine that the fines or penalties probably pay the wages of the inspectors. (my only visit was 1983)

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

It will keep you active, that is fer sure.

I deep fried some chicken and fries this weekend and the oil splashed on my arm. It didn't even hurt.

I'm conditioned from welding slag.

I am not that tough. I may not scream and dance but it would still hurt.

Slag down the shirt collar is the worst for me. Do the welders jig.

Torching multi layer stuff with rust in the layers is the worst. Are plasma rigs any better on that? I have been thinking of getting one.

They call me wolf man when i'm welding in the summer

OUWWWWWW YIKESSS OWWWCHHHH AAHAHHHHRRHHHGHH

 

[uscitizen]

I can shoot some purty paint too.
Been practicing with a Paasche airbrush for a while. MIght actually spray it on a vehicle some soon.

Or perhaps I should just open one of those airbrush tan parlors....

 

[Bfgrn]

Right-to-work laws are statutes enforced in twenty-two U.S. states, mostly in the southern or western U.S., allowed under provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act, which prohibit agreements between trade unions and employers making membership or payment of union dues or "fees" a condition of employment, either before or after hiring.

Right to work endangers safety and health standards that protect workers on the job by weakening unions that help to ensure worker safety by fighting for tougher safety rules. According to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, the rate of workplace deaths is 51 percent higher in states with right to work, where unions can’t speak up on behalf of workers

 

[del]

Right-to-work laws are statutes enforced in twenty-two U.S. states, mostly in the southern or western U.S., allowed under provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act, which prohibit agreements between trade unions and employers making membership or payment of union dues or "fees" a condition of employment, either before or after hiring.

Right to work endangers safety and health standards that protect workers on the job by weakening unions that help to ensure worker safety by fighting for tougher safety rules. According to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, the rate of workplace deaths is 51 percent higher in states with right to work, where unions can’t speak up on behalf of workers

you 've got a link for that i'm sure.

 

[Bfgrn]

Right-to-work laws are statutes enforced in twenty-two U.S. states, mostly in the southern or western U.S., allowed under provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act, which prohibit agreements between trade unions and employers making membership or payment of union dues or "fees" a condition of employment, either before or after hiring.

Right to work endangers safety and health standards that protect workers on the job by weakening unions that help to ensure worker safety by fighting for tougher safety rules. According to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, the rate of workplace deaths is 51 percent higher in states with right to work, where unions can’t speak up on behalf of workers

you 've got a link for that i'm sure.

Click on the title, then READ, then follow the reference footnotes.

In 2003 the rate of workplace fatalities per 100,000 workers was highest in right to work states.

19 of the top 25 states for worker fatality rates were Right to Work states, while 3 of the bottom 25 states were right to work states.

A study in 2001 showed that workers in Right to Work states earned an average of 6.5% less than their counterparts in states without the law.

 

[del]

Right-to-work laws are statutes enforced in twenty-two U.S. states, mostly in the southern or western U.S., allowed under provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act, which prohibit agreements between trade unions and employers making membership or payment of union dues or "fees" a condition of employment, either before or after hiring.

Right to work endangers safety and health standards that protect workers on the job by weakening unions that help to ensure worker safety by fighting for tougher safety rules. According to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, the rate of workplace deaths is 51 percent higher in states with right to work, where unions can’t speak up on behalf of workers

you 've got a link for that i'm sure.

Click on the title, then READ, then follow the reference footnotes.

In 2003 the rate of workplace fatalities per 100,000 workers was highest in right to work states.

19 of the top 25 states for worker fatality rates were Right to Work states, while 3 of the bottom 25 states were right to work states.

A study in 2001 showed that workers in Right to Work states earned an average of 6.5% less than their counterparts in states without the law.

i did and there's nothing to support your assertion that the rate of workplace deaths is 51 percent higher in states with right to work laws.

 

[Nosmo King]

Osha makes polices, but lots of folks ignore them. Fundamentally, it is the worker's responsibility to take care of his own tools and his own safety. No one else cares as much.

What OSHA has done is to reduce the threat of "Do stupid or get canned."

Actually, by law, it's the employer's responsibility, not the workers.

What industry are you currently working in or have worked in?

I was an Industrial Hygienist before I took my current position as county building inspector.

 

[Dr Gregg]

Corporations, prior to any regulations of the gov't, have a horrible track record of worker safety. Without regulations, many companies wouldn't spend the time and money to properly make sure that their workers are safe. Some would, but history shows that horrors would occur.

The rules set up by the feds hold business accountable, and set a national standard for safety conditions.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Corporations, prior to any regulations of the gov't, have a horrible track record of worker safety. Without regulations, many companies wouldn't spend the time and money to properly make sure that their workers are safe. Some would, but history shows that horrors would occur.

The rules set up by the feds hold business accountable, and set a national standard for safety conditions.

It should have been done on a state government level so it would have been in line with the constitution's 10th ammendment. Along with MANY other things we have let the federal government get away with taking power through.

Enforceable workplace safety rules, IMO, are a necessety.

 

[jillian]

Osha makes polices, but lots of folks ignore them. Fundamentally, it is the worker's responsibility to take care of his own tools and his own safety. No one else cares as much.

What OSHA has done is to reduce the threat of "Do stupid or get canned."

If the proper enforcement mechanisms are in effect, they can't be ignored.

Workers don't have the power to make their workplace safe. That power lies only with the employer. And they don't see that it IS safe unless someone is on their butts.

 

[Dr Gregg]

Corporations, prior to any regulations of the gov't, have a horrible track record of worker safety. Without regulations, many companies wouldn't spend the time and money to properly make sure that their workers are safe. Some would, but history shows that horrors would occur.

The rules set up by the feds hold business accountable, and set a national standard for safety conditions.

It should have been done on a state government level so it would have been in line with the constitution's 10th ammendment. Along with MANY other things we have let the federal government get away with taking power through.

Enforceable workplace safety rules, IMO, are a necessety.

Isn't it much better to have a unified set of regulations, instead of each and every state having different things?

 

[jillian]

It should have been done on a state government level so it would have been in line with the constitution's 10th ammendment. Along with MANY other things we have let the federal government get away with taking power through.

Enforceable workplace safety rules, IMO, are a necessety.

It isn't a 10th Amendment issue. In the same way as the feds set unemployment insurance and minimum wage, they have every right to establish workplace safety rules.

Why would you ignore the general welfare and interstate commerce clauses like that?

 

[rightwinger]

Corporations, prior to any regulations of the gov't, have a horrible track record of worker safety. Without regulations, many companies wouldn't spend the time and money to properly make sure that their workers are safe. Some would, but history shows that horrors would occur.

The rules set up by the feds hold business accountable, and set a national standard for safety conditions.

It should have been done on a state government level so it would have been in line with the constitution's 10th ammendment. Along with MANY other things we have let the federal government get away with taking power through.

Enforceable workplace safety rules, IMO, are a necessety.

Isn't it much better to have a unified set of regulations, instead of each and every state having different things?

You would have some States cutting corners on worker safety to attract companies from other States

 

[Dr Gregg]

It should have been done on a state government level so it would have been in line with the constitution's 10th ammendment. Along with MANY other things we have let the federal government get away with taking power through.

Enforceable workplace safety rules, IMO, are a necessety.

Isn't it much better to have a unified set of regulations, instead of each and every state having different things?

You would have some States cutting corners on worker safety to attract companies from other States

yeah, and who wants every state in the union to have an entire different set of rules and regulations, like they are their own country. that could get very confusing.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Corporations, prior to any regulations of the gov't, have a horrible track record of worker safety. Without regulations, many companies wouldn't spend the time and money to properly make sure that their workers are safe. Some would, but history shows that horrors would occur.

The rules set up by the feds hold business accountable, and set a national standard for safety conditions.

It should have been done on a state government level so it would have been in line with the constitution's 10th ammendment. Along with MANY other things we have let the federal government get away with taking power through.

Enforceable workplace safety rules, IMO, are a necessety.

Isn't it much better to have a unified set of regulations, instead of each and every state having different things?

On its face definately. However by doing so we transfer power out of our local controls in each state and into the hands of the federal government. This leaves rooms for local things to fall through the cracks and removes our local voices from any saftey concerns at our local workplace.

Plus the power to do so was not expressly given to the federal government in the constitution.

We need workplace safety rules or people will get hurt and the feds have already instituted them without challenge so what i'm saying on the 10th ammendment is sorta pointless. I just like to point out instances where the feds have overstepped their reach when I see em.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

It should have been done on a state government level so it would have been in line with the constitution's 10th ammendment. Along with MANY other things we have let the federal government get away with taking power through.

Enforceable workplace safety rules, IMO, are a necessety.

It isn't a 10th Amendment issue. In the same way as the feds set unemployment insurance and minimum wage, they have every right to establish workplace safety rules.

Why would you ignore the general welfare and interstate commerce clauses like that?

Workplace safety only relates to interstate commerce in the instances of product transportations on trains planes and road vehicles.

The feds could push states to pass laws, under general welfare, but since the constition says to promote not provide what your reaching at isn't there.

Read the post above this one for more clarification on why i said what i said.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Isn't it much better to have a unified set of regulations, instead of each and every state having different things?

You would have some States cutting corners on worker safety to attract companies from other States

yeah, and who wants every state in the union to have an entire different set of rules and regulations, like they are their own country. that could get very confusing.

THATS HOW WE WERE FOUNDED!!!

That was the intent of the language in the constition and we let progressives like Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow wilsion ignore that almost 100 years ago, we still haven't recovered and probably never will.

But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever. - John Adams

 

[jillian]

Workplace safety only relates to interstate commerce in the instances of product transportations on trains planes and road vehicles.

The feds could push states to pass laws, under general welfare, but since the constition says to promote not provide what your reaching at isn't there.

Read the post above this one for more clarification on why i said what i said.

It's already pretty clear that the Federal Government has the right to set standards. Why would anyone want such protections to be voluntary on the part of the States?

No. I'm not reaching because the case law is very clear that the power is pretty expansive.


Edit: I read your post above. The states' rights battle was lost by the states righters long ago for some very good reasons. 1) The Constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation and specifically created a stronger more centralized government; 2) The states' righters lost that battle when the confederacy lost the civil war; and 3) not all states can be trusted to do the right thing for their residents and the feds need to step in. Otherwise, we'd still be waiting for black students to be allowed to go to white colleges in Georgia.