Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
1,253
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 29:
Line 29: + + + +
Talk:Debate:Should government restrictions on smoking be tightened or rolled back? (view source)
Revision as of 16:55, July 23, 2008
, 16:55, July 23, 2008→Comments
::::::The difference with coal mining and pumping gas is that those hazards are intrinsic to the process, while smoking is not. When you make elective choices to add unnecessary risks to a workplace setting , you increase your liability. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 16:34, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
::::::The difference with coal mining and pumping gas is that those hazards are intrinsic to the process, while smoking is not. When you make elective choices to add unnecessary risks to a workplace setting , you increase your liability. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 16:34, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
:::::::...and if the risk is one that is known beforehand, then I say the worker's informed decision to work there should negate that "liability." Nobody is forced to take employment at an establishment that allows smoking. Yes, I know the immediate response: "Some people don't have many choices on where they work." Again, we're back to coal miners, who also generally work the mines because of limited employment opportunities.
:::::::I have no problem with reasonable guidelines to ensure workplace safety. The key word here is "reasonable." Ensuring that the building has fire escapes is reasonable; demanding that all keyboards be replaced with ergonomically-designed models to reduce the terrible risks of being injured at a 9-to-5 desk job is not. No job in the world is without some form of risk, and piling mandate after mandate on employers in order to "baby-proof" the workplace simply results in a lot of small businesses that can't stay afloat. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 12:55, 23 July 2008 (EDT)