Re: OT and long. OSHA coming to a small farm ?

Posted by NCWayne on November 14, 2014 at 08:41:24 from (173.188.169.54):

In Reply to: Re: OT and long. OSHA coming to a small farm ? posted by Greg1959 on November 13, 2014 at 17:47:38:

The situation here is a double indemnity case as far as I am concerned. In other words the miners are just as accountable for their deaths as the mine owner.

Think about it like t his. Based on the article the mine owner knew there were problems with the air quality, etc, but chose to do nothing. In this case, I agree, he has a hand in sharing the responsibility of the deaths of the miners by not providing a safe workplace for his employees. Thing is though, all he is actually responsible for is not repairing problems reported to him my MSHA, and I believe he should be at least fined for doing so.

Now here's the kicker. Under the rules of both OSHA, as well as MSHA, workers can refuse to do their jobs when faced with what they feel are unsafe conditions, and they can not be legally fired for doing so. This is supposed to keep an owner from just constantly cycling through people to keep the doors open and turning a profit, without taking care of the unsafe conditions.

In this case the conditions were known, and had been reported by MSHA to be unsafe. In other words the miners, as individuals, knew that what they were doing, the conditions they were working under, were unsafe. Now I ask, since the mine owner couldn't legally fire them for not working, who is at fault? Is he at fault for not correcting the problems, or are they at fault for continuing to work even when they knew it was unsafe?

Like I said, the owner should be liable for fines, etc for not doing his part, and if it shut him down, that's OK. On the other hand, the men that continued to work when they knew it was unsafe, even though they had the protection of MSHA's regulations behind them. In my opinion this makes them responsible for their own deaths, NOT the mine's owner.

Ultimately this is what OSHA and MSHA were designed to do. They were designed to make the owner accountable for offering a safe workplace, but not to take away the responsibility of the worker for also being safe. As a result they offer the safety to the worker that they can't be fired for doing something unsafe. That basically gives them a two pronged spear to use against unsafe employers as it allows the workers to provide their own level of safety and protection, when the regulatory inspectors aren't around, without fear for their jobs. Ultimately the owner can either be fined out of existence for not following the rules, or the workers can simply refuse to work, or quit, and put him out of business.

So, why didn't the miners simply tell him where to go, and either quit and go to work in another mine, strike, or simply refuse to work and call MSHA once again? Ultimately they chose, as individuals, to go to work, unsafe conditions or not.

So, is the employer responsible for the miners deaths? The answer is yes, but only in the sense that a gun manufacturer is responsible for their product being used to shoot someone. In other words he may have created a situation where the conditions for something bad to happen existed, but he didn't whip and beat them into going down into the mine to work anymore than a gun manufacturer points their product at someone and pulls the trigger.

Ultimately it's all about personal responsibility. Unfortunately that's something people in this country have been taught doesn't really matter anymore. Regardless of what happens, there is always something, somewhere to tell you the problem belongs to someone else. By the time the fingers all get done pointing, NO ONE is responsible for anything because for each one it's always the others fault. Sounds to me like that's the same thing happening here, except that the agencies have to point their finger somewhere in order to make money off of fines, and in this case take away a mans freedom because 10 other guys decided that taking a chance and doing something unsafe was OK with them, as anything that happened wasn't their fault.

To put this all in a really simple situation that all can understand. God made the world and provided nice, flat, green meadows that you can lounge around in. He also provided mountains and sheer cliff faces. So, here we have it, He provided the nice, safe meadow, and he also provided the wildly unsafe cliff. However YOU decided to climb the cliff face -vs- kicking back and watching the clouds in the meadow.so again, who is responsible? In the end, take out all the regulations, the inspectors, and all the other BS, and it's just that simple.

Unfortunately our illustrious leaders have put way many regulations, etc into place in an attempt to take the human factor out of everything, but in the end, to quote Ron White, "You can't fix stupid". Sadly, from what I have seen, they have managed to regulate it, so instead of having a species where survival of the fittest actually works, they have protected the idiots from themselves, and allowed they have been allowed to carry on living. So, in essence, "stupid" has been allowed to breed.......and the employer is now responsible for the lives of all the idiots working for him....instead of them being responsible for themselves.

Replies:

Add a Reply! You must be Logged In to Post Name: E-Mail: Subject: Comments: Optional Link URL: Link Title: Optional Image URL: Optional Video Title: Optional Video URL: Advanced Posting Options Email Notification: If you check this box, email will be sent to you whenever someone replies to this message. Your email address must be entered above to receive notification. This notification will be cancelled automatically after 2 weeks.   Advanced Posting Tools   Upload Photo  Select Gallery Photo  Attach Serial No List  Return to Post

TRACTOR PARTS	TRACTOR MANUALS

We sell tractor parts!  We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]