treehumper
Carpal tunnel level member
- Location
- Ridgefield, NJ
Re: re: jamoco
That's why the section copied is in quotations.
AS for the declining rates... OSHA is one of the last steps in a long line of government actions taken dating back to the 1880s. While post wwII rates were falling the economic boon of the 60s led to a rise (Historically, workplace accidents go up during times of economic growth) leading to the creation of the act.
Through a combination of actions driven by government, management, unions and employees there has been a decline in the dangers in the workplace. One of the key factors was the introduction of workers compensation law in 1908. Basically making accidents more expensive for employers. Here the free market then does kick in. Mind you it now had a set of rules to play by. All that WC did was set a bar that imposed a legal liability on employers that the courts were unwilling to do previously. Free markets did not establish better working conditions. A push back by those at risk did. While government isn't the sole answer its purpose to act for the whole of society gives voice to those that otherwise don't have one. But, that alas is a voice that can be bought...
While I support competition, entrepreneurship and initiative by individuals to make a better life for themselves, I don't believe this happens without a framework by which those competitors vie for business. The free market is driven by the bottomline and only if it is good for that will changes be made. Often efforts are made by the free market to resist any effort to improve safety as it is only seen as an expense without any upside (despite plenty of historic data to the contrary).
During the industrial revolution most factory and unskilled workers lived in poverty and didn't participate in the prosperity that was experienced by the few. Competition was quashed through unscrupulous practices. While much of the efforts of industrialists led to immense economic growth it was to the benefit of the few at the expense of many. I really haven't seen too many businesses that have sought to invest in capital equipment to make wages increase. Usually it is to reduce wage burdens as this is one of the only expenses a business has that doesn't have any asset value assigned to it on the balance sheet.
There is much more research being done to understand the dangers within the workplace and how it affects a business' operations and fiscal performance. However, improving wealth of society doesn't translate into a safer workplace and the data does support that. Why is that? We have seen it amongst our own ranks. Production trumps safety. Turnover due to improved economic opportunity leads to more new untrained workers who experience a higher accident rate. A lack of qualified workers to handle increased workloads leads to overwork and fatigue, again, a statistically significant contributor to accidents. Workplace safety has no limit if the willingness to continually improve conditions is ingrained in the culture of society and business.
Yes, the working people are the ones with the most vested interest in workplace safety but without organization and a collective voice they don't have sufficient clout to effect change. Remember the golden rule, he who has the gold makes the rules. And those rules will generally favor them keeping the gold.....
That's why the section copied is in quotations.
AS for the declining rates... OSHA is one of the last steps in a long line of government actions taken dating back to the 1880s. While post wwII rates were falling the economic boon of the 60s led to a rise (Historically, workplace accidents go up during times of economic growth) leading to the creation of the act.
Through a combination of actions driven by government, management, unions and employees there has been a decline in the dangers in the workplace. One of the key factors was the introduction of workers compensation law in 1908. Basically making accidents more expensive for employers. Here the free market then does kick in. Mind you it now had a set of rules to play by. All that WC did was set a bar that imposed a legal liability on employers that the courts were unwilling to do previously. Free markets did not establish better working conditions. A push back by those at risk did. While government isn't the sole answer its purpose to act for the whole of society gives voice to those that otherwise don't have one. But, that alas is a voice that can be bought...
While I support competition, entrepreneurship and initiative by individuals to make a better life for themselves, I don't believe this happens without a framework by which those competitors vie for business. The free market is driven by the bottomline and only if it is good for that will changes be made. Often efforts are made by the free market to resist any effort to improve safety as it is only seen as an expense without any upside (despite plenty of historic data to the contrary).
During the industrial revolution most factory and unskilled workers lived in poverty and didn't participate in the prosperity that was experienced by the few. Competition was quashed through unscrupulous practices. While much of the efforts of industrialists led to immense economic growth it was to the benefit of the few at the expense of many. I really haven't seen too many businesses that have sought to invest in capital equipment to make wages increase. Usually it is to reduce wage burdens as this is one of the only expenses a business has that doesn't have any asset value assigned to it on the balance sheet.
There is much more research being done to understand the dangers within the workplace and how it affects a business' operations and fiscal performance. However, improving wealth of society doesn't translate into a safer workplace and the data does support that. Why is that? We have seen it amongst our own ranks. Production trumps safety. Turnover due to improved economic opportunity leads to more new untrained workers who experience a higher accident rate. A lack of qualified workers to handle increased workloads leads to overwork and fatigue, again, a statistically significant contributor to accidents. Workplace safety has no limit if the willingness to continually improve conditions is ingrained in the culture of society and business.
Yes, the working people are the ones with the most vested interest in workplace safety but without organization and a collective voice they don't have sufficient clout to effect change. Remember the golden rule, he who has the gold makes the rules. And those rules will generally favor them keeping the gold.....
