English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Source: Hazard Magazine's Too Young to Die Report and The Guardian newspaper.

2006-08-12 03:36:40 · 12 answers · asked by sleepyredlion 4 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

12 answers

Employers always put the bottom line first and get away with what they can.
Best thing for anyone to do is to join a trade union which will not only educate workers on health & safety issues but also help members take on employers to put things right. The next best thing to do after a worker has joined the union is then to become a trade union activist; for example become a shop steward and/or health&safety rep.
We should all become familiar with H&S law in our own country and learn how to use it to safeguard our lives and wellbeing.

2006-08-12 04:29:04 · answer #1 · answered by Pema 2 · 1 0

Yes they do put profits first and since thatcher here in the U.K. it has got worse.
Now comedians, like that clarkson idiot on the bbc make jokes about `health and safety` maybe they would not be so jovial if they had to pick up the dead body that fell from the ladder in the dead of night because the deceased was working alone with no-one to `foot` the ladder. Or had to mop up the blood from the young lad who had his arm ripped off because the machine had no safety guard and the young man had no training.

Yes, it is a very cruel and dangerous world out there in manufacturing, construction and anywhere that manual work is carried out.
Our standards of industrial safety will only improve if profits can be linked to it.
Multi nationalism has made it worse as most companies now have no national loyalty, just a greedy hunger for wealth. If you have stricter health and safety regulations, they will move the product to somewhere that doesn`t.
Everything is done to please and appease the shareholder and I guess that they are either ignorant of what happens or have a bloated sense of apathy to match their swollen wallets.

I am afraid the gap between `haves` and `have nots` is growing increasingly wider and since thatcher sowed the seeds of not caring for your fellow man it has got much worse.

Welcome back to the 19th century folks !

2006-08-12 04:03:18 · answer #2 · answered by Robert Abuse 7 · 1 1

Whats the rate for 24 - 30 or 55-65 within the same industries.
Is the rate lower for older employees? If it is, then the workplace is probably safe and it may be that the 16-24 year olds need to learn how to pay more attention to they are doing.

2006-08-12 03:45:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Darwin comes to mind. . .

Eighteen or Nineteen should be plenty old enough to do pretty much anything.
Do you really want 16-17 year olds to NOT be able to find a job? To be out wandering the streets broke and board? That really is something to consider. For every one hurt every 40 minutes, how many others successfully make it through another work day?

2006-08-12 03:43:12 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Get counseling set up now in the previous you have custody of this boy. He could have a terrible domicile life and desires this help. you besides mght desire help in fixing/helping this little boy so a counselor would be waiting to grant you the techniques to try this. you may tell your husband which you will supply it a try yet won't enable your youngest one to be harm continuously by utilising his older brother. You and your husband could take a seat together with his son and clarify the regulations of the domicile and what's going to take place in case you do no longer stick to them. See if your husband can get bypass away for no less than a pair of weeks once you first get the boy so he can help with the self-discipline and adjustment. He desires his dad and with a bit of luck it gets greater helpful whilst he's with you.

2016-12-17 09:35:17 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

yes definately i saw a woman in a shop yesterday which i know pays crap wages, with a tin pot ramp over the steps, pulling a huge conainer on wheels full of boxes with cans, chocolate, etc up the ramp, not with much success eventually a man got behind and started pushing the container from the other side, still they couldnt get it up, i said to the girl that was serving me i cant believe what im seeing surley this is againt health and saftey the poor women looked fit to drop, this shop is a chain of well known shops, the girls answer to me was, i know but weave got to get it in nobody cares how. People should speak up, its not worth your own health.

2006-08-12 03:50:38 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I think it is more telling that the age group that is statistically more prone to care less and take more risk is the number one demographic getting injured. Oddly enough 25 is the age your car insurance drops dramatically as well.

2006-08-12 03:51:55 · answer #7 · answered by JFra472449 6 · 0 0

Not to be disrespectful, but, I think this falls in the Well Duhhh, category..
Employers are way more concerned about the bottom line than about the people who work for them... employees are 'cannon fodder'.

2006-08-12 03:41:09 · answer #8 · answered by chuckufarley2a 6 · 1 1

I work for a subsidiary of DuPont everyday I hear about safety. DuPont tells us safety comes before finishing a job.

2006-08-12 04:05:42 · answer #9 · answered by john p 3 · 0 0

employers have been putting money before lives for millieum.
Money has a tendency to override conscience.

2006-08-12 03:41:06 · answer #10 · answered by Norman de'Plume 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers