Smoking weed at work

So, it seems that many here approve of legalizing marijuana for personal use.

If it ever becomes legalized, would you consider that legality to extend to the workplace?

[One of MILLIONS] Example: You drive a forklift. Should you be allowed to smoke weed at work on your breaks and / or being high while executing the tasks of your job?

Discuss.

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
So, it seems that many here approve of legalizing marijuana for personal use.

If it ever becomes legalized, would you consider that legality to extend to the workplace?

[One of MILLIONS] Example: You drive a forklift. Should you be allowed to smoke weed at work on your breaks and / or being high while executing the tasks of your job?

Discuss.

It should absolutely be legal to smoke at work.

That doesn't mean that it will be allowable at work though. That is rightfully the decision of the owner of the property and business in question.

_________________
"I supported President Lincoln. I believed his war policy would be the only way to save the country, but I see my mistake. I visited Washington a few weeks ago, and I saw the corruption of the present administration - and so long as Abraham Lincoln and his Cabinet are in power, so long will war continue. And for what? For the preservation of the Constitution and the Union? No, but for the sake of politicians and government contractors." J.P. Morgan, American financier and banker, 1864

lol.


1. No it shouldn't be legal to smoke at work. For obvious reasons. This is coming from someone thats smoked every day for the last 2 years straight. Short term memory loss will make you suck at any desk job, and at any ordinary job you'll probably end up giving stuff away for free or losing a company millions. But its kind of like drinking at work, so people would probably still come to work high anyway if it were legal.

2. It should be legalized. However, requiring someone to be at least 18/21 years of age to buy/use.

3. There needs to be a lot more testing done on marijuana in general. Theres probably a lot more that they could learn about it, but for some reason the government is stupid.
Post edited by Vaxemous at 10/7/2011 10:42:52 AM

I had a problem once... it was a driver we had had who was responsible for delivering medical equipment.

So... long story short... Guy totals the medical equipment van with 3 very expensive power wheelchairs for people with spinal cord injuries and almost kills some other guy in the car he hit.

Thank god I had a $3 million (per incident) dollar insurance rider on everything... It was a really bad incident.
Not only did the 3 chairs in the back of the delivery van cost almost $60K to replace, the cost to replacem the van... there was a civil suit against the company as well as the guy, because when the cops showed up... asshole was high and had marijuana on him.

Insurance company paid out the $3million and dropped us.

This was a little over 10 years ago... stressful period.
not bullshitting.

After that incident... we cleared house... Since the other office is in another part of New Jersey, we kinda just depended on the warehouse manager down there to take care of shit while we were up at the billing/retail location...
My old man started having to make trips down to the other location, and found out that there was a marijuana problem we needed to take care of.

So... the other part of the business I do is seating and mobility for people with spinal cord injuries and kids with cerebal palsy... You can't have people smoking weed on their breaks when they're assembling $10K-$30K power chairs with custom modifications for people who depend on these things as their sole method of independence.

Now... we're anal about drugs (no homo).
Can't do that shit.

Remove Bullet #2. The premise has already been established that weed has been legalized. See the OP.

Pay attention to detail.

Regards,

S

Originally posted by: Vaxemous


1. No it shouldn't be legal to smoke at work.

Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest


It should absolutely be legal to smoke at work.

That doesn't mean that it will be allowable at work though. That is rightfully the decision of the owner of the property and business in question.

This. End thread.


We're not even allowed to smoke cigarettes at work (outside)
Post edited by Voxël at 10/7/2011 10:46:20 AM

---

So far, Mack says it shouldnt be allowed at work based upon experience, despite being legal.

Who's Rights have precedence? The owner or the individual? What if its a corporation where it isnt a proprietorship?

Who should the gvt side with?

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
So, it seems that many here approve of legalizing marijuana for personal use.

If it ever becomes legalized, would you consider that legality to extend to the workplace?

[One of MILLIONS] Example: You drive a forklift. Should you be allowed to smoke weed at work on your breaks and / or being high while executing the tasks of your job?

Discuss.

what a sloppy premise.

first, if it becomes legal, then it would be legal everywhere.

though, private business might not (by choice) allow consumption or presence in the body (within) in their private property, it would still be a legal substance though, just not allowed on THAT private property, IF the owner so decides.

Then you have the issue of "operating under the influence". Just like alcohol, it is recognized that pot alters the mind while present.

that's why it is not legal to drive a forklift or a car or a boat or fly a plane while intoxicated...with alcohol...or, in your supposed future scenario...with pot in the system.

would it not work?

stop wasting our time, we got important threads started by me all over the Forums.

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
So, it seems that many here approve of legalizing marijuana for personal use.

If it ever becomes legalized, would you consider that legality to extend to the workplace?

[One of MILLIONS] Example: You drive a forklift. Should you be allowed to smoke weed at work on your breaks and / or being high while executing the tasks of your job?

Discuss.

No.

Don't confuse the legality of a substance vs. it's ability to impair your judgement.

Alcohol is legal, but most employers would fire you if you drank at work, especially if your job includes driving heavy machinery.

Even if pot were legal (which it should be), it can still impair your judgement just like alcohol, and should not be tolerated in the workforce.

Let me tell you guys... getting sued by someone because you had an employee who was under the influence of marijuana when driving around on the job is stressful.

I don't relish the days we were in conference with the attorneys asking them if the lawsuit would affect our homes and personal savings when the plaintiff's attorneys are throwing out numbers that you don't have.

Y'know how negotiations went down?

It was: The business has no assets, it's all accounts recievables... we have a low inventory because we have to wait X-months before we get paid on claims after equipment delivery... So if you ask for MORE than what is covered by the insurance rider, we'll declare bankrupcty, you still won't get it, and the insurance company will make your attorney work harder for a settlement.

sucked. The whole thing sucked.

Originally posted by: Bibimbap
Let me tell you guys... getting sued by someone because you had an employee who was under the influence of marijuana when driving around on the job is stressful.

I don't relish the days we were in conference with the attorneys asking them if the lawsuit would affect our homes and personal savings when the plaintiff's attorneys are throwing out numbers that you don't have.

Y'know how negotiations went down?

It was: The business has no assets, it's all accounts recievables... we have a low inventory because we have to wait X-months before we get paid on claims after equipment delivery... So if you ask for MORE than what is covered by the insurance rider, we'll declare bankrupcty, you still won't get it, and the insurance company will make your attorney work harder for a settlement.

sucked. The whole thing sucked.

True but some of this headache would be negated if pot was legalized. Than this would be just another driving while drunk case. And yes those are a hassle still... but there isn't as much red tape.

I dunno if this point makes sense... I'm a little high myself while working from home.
___________

Pure 2: Tribes 2 movie - keeping hope alive for fps games

What a stupid thread. Of course weed shouldn't be allowed to be smoked at work, legal or not.

Originally posted by: Evil Napkin

Originally posted by: Bibimbap
Let me tell you guys... getting sued by someone because you had an employee who was under the influence of marijuana when driving around on the job is stressful.

I don't relish the days we were in conference with the attorneys asking them if the lawsuit would affect our homes and personal savings when the plaintiff's attorneys are throwing out numbers that you don't have.

Y'know how negotiations went down?

It was: The business has no assets, it's all accounts recievables... we have a low inventory because we have to wait X-months before we get paid on claims after equipment delivery... So if you ask for MORE than what is covered by the insurance rider, we'll declare bankrupcty, you still won't get it, and the insurance company will make your attorney work harder for a settlement.

sucked. The whole thing sucked.

True but some of this headache would be negated if pot was legalized. Than this would be just another driving while drunk case. And yes those are a hassle still... but there isn't as much red tape.

I dunno if this point makes sense... I'm a little high myself while working from home.

Nah... the kid was still under the influence... pot or not...

The marijuana offense and assault (vehicular assault) landed him in jail... but the headache was the DUI in the store van while on the job.

it should be legalized and handled the exact same way as alcohol, probably in all aspects.

Originally posted by: Voxël

Originally posted by: Vaxemous


1. No it shouldn't be legal to smoke at work.

Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest


It should absolutely be legal to smoke at work.

That doesn't mean that it will be allowable at work though. That is rightfully the decision of the owner of the property and business in question.

This. End thread.


We're not even allowed to smoke cigarettes at work (outside)

This.

Can't smoke cigarettes on company property, even in your own vehicle. Guys have been thrown off site for it, which essentially means they were fired because they were banned from accessing their work site.

Originally posted by: Bibimbap
Let me tell you guys... getting sued by someone because you had an employee who was under the influence of marijuana when driving around on the job is stressful.

I don't relish the days we were in conference with the attorneys asking them if the lawsuit would affect our homes and personal savings when the plaintiff's attorneys are throwing out numbers that you don't have.

Y'know how negotiations went down?

It was: The business has no assets, it's all accounts recievables... we have a low inventory because we have to wait X-months before we get paid on claims after equipment delivery... So if you ask for MORE than what is covered by the insurance rider, we'll declare bankrupcty, you still won't get it, and the insurance company will make your attorney work harder for a settlement.

sucked. The whole thing sucked.

The only reason you should have been concerned with that issue was if you were a sole proprietor. If you had incorporated, you would have been sleeping like a baby. That's the whole point of incorporating(besides some tax bennys), it seperates you Mackadoody Bibimap from ABC drugstore. You and the business are legally seperated from each other, despite the fact your family owns it.

Originally posted by: =>PX<=Major

Originally posted by: Bibimbap
Let me tell you guys... getting sued by someone because you had an employee who was under the influence of marijuana when driving around on the job is stressful.

I don't relish the days we were in conference with the attorneys asking them if the lawsuit would affect our homes and personal savings when the plaintiff's attorneys are throwing out numbers that you don't have.

Y'know how negotiations went down?

It was: The business has no assets, it's all accounts recievables... we have a low inventory because we have to wait X-months before we get paid on claims after equipment delivery... So if you ask for MORE than what is covered by the insurance rider, we'll declare bankrupcty, you still won't get it, and the insurance company will make your attorney work harder for a settlement.

sucked. The whole thing sucked.

The only reason you should have been concerned with that issue was if you were a sole proprietor. If you had incorporated, you would have been sleeping like a baby. That's the whole point of incorporating(besides some tax bennys), it seperates you Mackadoody Bibimap from ABC drugstore. You and the business are legally seperated from each other, despite the fact your family owns it.

Right!

Since we're a Subchapter S corporation, our personal accounts/savings weren't touchable by the plaintiff.

Granted, the guy almost got killed, and became disabled (no question to that) from the accident... so he deserved compensation... but they were throwing out numbers in the tens of millions.

If they tried to go beyond the coverage of the insurance rider, we would have no choice but to liquidate the company's assets and go Chapter 11 (then go and set up shop again somewhere else and start over)...

That would have sucked... Lose your business because some asshole you had someone hire for you was DUI in a company vehicle...

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
So, it seems that many here approve of legalizing marijuana for personal use.

If it ever becomes legalized, would you consider that legality to extend to the workplace?

[One of MILLIONS] Example: You drive a forklift. Should you be allowed to smoke weed at work on your breaks and / or being high while executing the tasks of your job?

Discuss.

First you should NEVER be using drugs on the job. Their is no logical argument for it. Even if weed is legalized you would still most likely not be able to smoke because they can't test like alcohol if you just used or when you used. THC stays in the bloodstream too long and the BWC or OSHA would never allow it.
_______________________________________________________________
"You get more with kind words and a gun than you do with just kind words"

Originally posted by: Bibimbap

Originally posted by: =>PX<=Major

Originally posted by: Bibimbap
Let me tell you guys... getting sued by someone because you had an employee who was under the influence of marijuana when driving around on the job is stressful.

I don't relish the days we were in conference with the attorneys asking them if the lawsuit would affect our homes and personal savings when the plaintiff's attorneys are throwing out numbers that you don't have.

Y'know how negotiations went down?

It was: The business has no assets, it's all accounts recievables... we have a low inventory because we have to wait X-months before we get paid on claims after equipment delivery... So if you ask for MORE than what is covered by the insurance rider, we'll declare bankrupcty, you still won't get it, and the insurance company will make your attorney work harder for a settlement.

sucked. The whole thing sucked.

The only reason you should have been concerned with that issue was if you were a sole proprietor. If you had incorporated, you would have been sleeping like a baby. That's the whole point of incorporating(besides some tax bennys), it seperates you Mackadoody Bibimap from ABC drugstore. You and the business are legally seperated from each other, despite the fact your family owns it.

Right!

Since we're a Subchapter S corporation, our personal accounts/savings weren't touchable by the plaintiff.

Granted, the guy almost got killed, and became disabled (no question to that) from the accident... so he deserved compensation... but they were throwing out numbers in the tens of millions.

If they tried to go beyond the coverage of the insurance rider, we would have no choice but to liquidate the company's assets and go Chapter 11 (then go and set up shop again somewhere else and start over)...

That would have sucked... Lose your business because some asshole you had someone hire for you was DUI in a company vehicle...

That's what you pay insurance for, unless your states insurance laws are different, your insurance company would have been on the hook. If they didn't tell you that or if you didn't have legal representation to tell you that, I'd find a new company(pending the laws in your state).

In my state, it's the insurance company on the hook.

Originally posted by: =>PX<=Major

That's what you pay insurance for, unless your states insurance laws are different, your insurance company would have been on the hook. If they didn't tell you that or if you didn't have legal representation to tell you that, I'd find a new company(pending the laws in your state).

In my state, it's the insurance company on the hook.

That's why I said

I don't relish the days we were in conference with the attorneys asking them if the lawsuit would affect our homes and personal savings when the plaintiff's attorneys are throwing out numbers that you don't have.

The attorneys for the plaintiff were all fire and brimstone.
We sat with the attorneys from the insurance company and were making sure that the plaintiff couldn't lay claim on our personal assets.

edit:
Sometimes your corporation can't get a loan (or something) without a personal guarantee... Otherwise, tons of people would be drawing up corporations to take out loans and swiftly declaring bankruptcy on the corporations.

The business has been incorporated since 1978, so we were actually very safe... They could not even get close to our personal assets.
Post edited by Bibimbap at 10/7/2011 1:04:57 PM

C'mon people get with the program: You chong down BEFORE work... geesh...

Originally posted by: Buzzed
What a stupid thread. Of course weed shouldn't be allowed to be smoked at work, legal or not.

Hey, some people believe weed should be smoked anywhere and not penalized for it. You need to take a closer look at *who* says what and what they are saying.

Threads like this facilitate more than just whats on the surface. Do you need me to go into further detail?

Everything I say is for a reason and not some knee jerk reaction like Malaria's general stupidity, FSB's douchebag double standards, or "?" retardation. But if thats your forte, then I encourage you to eat to your heat's content on such bland fare.

But NBF killed it immediately with the correct answer, with all due subtlety and pervasion.

Originally posted by: Puckfist
But NBF killed it immediately with the correct answer, with all due subtlety and pervasion.

Talk about being naive. Safety is not up to the owner. That's why we have OSHA.
_______________________________________________________________
"You get more with kind words and a gun than you do with just kind words"

Could a marijuana store employee smoke while at work? Could a fry cook at Sonic? Could a medical marijuana recipient for fibromyalgia smoke so they could work as a sales employee? Isn't it the business's job to manage if their employee is functioning well? What happened to your distaste for the nanny state?

OSHA can make rules all it wants, and if it honestly thinks saying "NO ONE ANYWHERE CAN EVER USE POT AT THE WORKPLACE" is the most reasonable, direct policy - as opposed to say, restricting it to driving (which would remain illegal), operating equipment, construction, etc. - then I look forward to the exchange of one enforcement impossibility for another.
Post edited by Puckfist at 10/7/2011 1:31:15 PM

Originally posted by: Puckfist
Could a marijuana store employee smoke while at work? Could a fry cook at Sonic? Could a medical marijuana recipient for fibromyalgia smoke so they could work as a sales employee? Isn't it the business's job to manage if their employee is functioning well? What happened to your distaste for the nanny state?

OSHA can make rules all it wants, and if it honestly thinks saying "NO ONE ANYWHERE CAN EVER USE POT AT THE WORKPLACE" is the most reasonable, direct policy - as opposed to say, restricting it to driving (which would remain illegal), operating equipment, construction, etc. - then I look forward to the exchange of one enforcement impossibility for another.

If I were a Sonic franchisee, I would NOT want my fry cook to be smoking pot and EATING all my customer's food... If he's gonna get the munchies... do it AWAY from the popcorn chicken!

Originally posted by: Puckfist
But NBF killed it immediately with the correct answer, with all due subtlety and pervasion.

why dont u wait to see what others have to say. Patience.

Why is this so difficult? Is it allowed for people to drink alcohol on their breaks? No? Then why should pot be any different? Yet alcohol is still legal.

And if you come in to work high as fuck, treat the employee the same as if he came in to work smashed.

/thread
Post edited by =TIO= Fluffytuff at 10/7/2011 2:15:35 PM

------------------------------------------------------
"An eye for an eye, and the whole world would be blind." - Khalil Gibran

Originally posted by: =TIO= Fluffytuff
Why is this so difficult? Is it allowed for people to drink alcohol on their breaks? No? Then why should pot be any different? Yet alcohol is still legal.

And if you come in to work high as fuck, treat the employee the same as if he came in to work smashed.

/thread

Exactly


_______________________________________________________________
"You get more with kind words and a gun than you do with just kind words"

Originally posted by: Killet
it should be legalized and handled the exact same way as alcohol, probably in all aspects.

thats right

We don't need a law for everything. If government legislates everything, in a vain attempt to "help" or "protect" people, then you no longer live in a free society.

Let the owner of the Sonic on this street allow his fry cooks to toke on the job if he likes. The results are his problem/success to deal with.

At the same fucking time: let the owner of the Sonic on the next street over disallow his fry cooks to toke on the job if he likes. The results are his problem/success to deal with too.

Just let people be free, goddamn it.

_________________
"I supported President Lincoln. I believed his war policy would be the only way to save the country, but I see my mistake. I visited Washington a few weeks ago, and I saw the corruption of the present administration - and so long as Abraham Lincoln and his Cabinet are in power, so long will war continue. And for what? For the preservation of the Constitution and the Union? No, but for the sake of politicians and government contractors." J.P. Morgan, American financier and banker, 1864

Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
We don't need a law for everything. If government legislates everything, in a vain attempt to "help" or "protect" people, then you no longer live in a free society.

Let the owner of the Sonic on this street allow his fry cooks to toke on the job if he likes. The results are his problem/success to deal with.

At the same fucking time: let the owner of the Sonic on the next street over disallow his fry cooks to toke on the job if he likes. The results are his problem/success to deal with too.

Just let people be free, goddamn it.

You are so naive and ignorant at times. We do pay for it. Ever hear of workers comp, unemployment, liability ins, etc? Every worker hurt effects many. Seems like you and some of the stoner kids fail yet again to understand how business works. Your ideology doesn't work in the real world
Post edited by ~~Snake~~ at 10/7/2011 3:31:13 PM

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: Puckfist
But NBF killed it immediately with the correct answer, with all due subtlety and pervasion.

Talk about being naive. Safety is not up to the owner. That's why we have OSHA.

What flavor of fucking stupid are you? If you have 3 active brain cells you'd know that OSHA enforces rules. Safety is always the responsibility of the owners. The onus is always on management to ensure their company meets all safety requirements.

Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
We don't need a law for everything.

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~"The Conservative"
Yes we do.

_________________
"I supported President Lincoln. I believed his war policy would be the only way to save the country, but I see my mistake. I visited Washington a few weeks ago, and I saw the corruption of the present administration - and so long as Abraham Lincoln and his Cabinet are in power, so long will war continue. And for what? For the preservation of the Constitution and the Union? No, but for the sake of politicians and government contractors." J.P. Morgan, American financier and banker, 1864

Originally posted by: Smiling Canadian

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: Puckfist
But NBF killed it immediately with the correct answer, with all due subtlety and pervasion.

Talk about being naive. Safety is not up to the owner. That's why we have OSHA.

What flavor of fucking stupid are you? If you have 3 active brain cells you'd know that OSHA enforces rules. Safety is always the responsibility of the owners. The onus is always on management to ensure their company meets all safety requirements.

I have more brains than you. I work with OSHA all the time. They set the rules for business because before they were around sleazeball owners took advantage of workers. Now shut the fuck up and run along

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: Smiling Canadian

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: Puckfist
But NBF killed it immediately with the correct answer, with all due subtlety and pervasion.

Talk about being naive. Safety is not up to the owner. That's why we have OSHA.

What flavor of fucking stupid are you? If you have 3 active brain cells you'd know that OSHA enforces rules. Safety is always the responsibility of the owners. The onus is always on management to ensure their company meets all safety requirements.

I have more brains than you. I work with OSHA all the time. They set the rules for business because before they were around sleazeball owners took advantage of workers. Now shut the fuck up and run along

Yeah, and it's up to the owners to ENFORCE the safety rules.

Cops don't write the laws, but they enforce them.

Same thing.

You can write rules all damn day long, but if the BUSINESS isn't enforcing them, it doesn't mean shit.

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: Smiling Canadian

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: Puckfist
But NBF killed it immediately with the correct answer, with all due subtlety and pervasion.

Talk about being naive. Safety is not up to the owner. That's why we have OSHA.

What flavor of fucking stupid are you? If you have 3 active brain cells you'd know that OSHA enforces rules. Safety is always the responsibility of the owners. The onus is always on management to ensure their company meets all safety requirements.

I have more brains than you. I work with OSHA all the time. They set the rules for business because before they were around sleazeball owners took advantage of workers. Now shut the fuck up and run along

Got some evidence for that? The reason I ask is that I just got through a chapter of Tom Woods' book "Rollback: Repealing Big Government Before the Coming Fiscal Collapse" where he took a shit all over OSHA.

_________________
"I supported President Lincoln. I believed his war policy would be the only way to save the country, but I see my mistake. I visited Washington a few weeks ago, and I saw the corruption of the present administration - and so long as Abraham Lincoln and his Cabinet are in power, so long will war continue. And for what? For the preservation of the Constitution and the Union? No, but for the sake of politicians and government contractors." J.P. Morgan, American financier and banker, 1864

Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: Smiling Canadian

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: Puckfist
But NBF killed it immediately with the correct answer, with all due subtlety and pervasion.

Talk about being naive. Safety is not up to the owner. That's why we have OSHA.

What flavor of fucking stupid are you? If you have 3 active brain cells you'd know that OSHA enforces rules. Safety is always the responsibility of the owners. The onus is always on management to ensure their company meets all safety requirements.

I have more brains than you. I work with OSHA all the time. They set the rules for business because before they were around sleazeball owners took advantage of workers. Now shut the fuck up and run along

Got some evidence for that? The reason I ask is that I just got through a chapter of Tom Woods' book "Rollback: Repealing Big Government Before the Coming Fiscal Collapse" where he took a shit all over OSHA.

Work place safety before 1970 sucked. That means as an American worker you could have been exposed to chemicals, fall hazards, etc with little recourse. Food manufacturing had food being contaminated. Before lockout/tag out you had deaths and injuries. I'm working and will see if I can get you info later
_______________________________________________________________
"You get more with kind words and a gun than you do with just kind words"

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: Smiling Canadian

Originally posted by: ~~Snake~~

Originally posted by: Puckfist
But NBF killed it immediately with the correct answer, with all due subtlety and pervasion.

Talk about being naive. Safety is not up to the owner. That's why we have OSHA.

What flavor of fucking stupid are you? If you have 3 active brain cells you'd know that OSHA enforces rules. Safety is always the responsibility of the owners. The onus is always on management to ensure their company meets all safety requirements.

I have more brains than you. I work with OSHA all the time. They set the rules for business because before they were around sleazeball owners took advantage of workers. Now shut the fuck up and run along

Got some evidence for that? The reason I ask is that I just got through a chapter of Tom Woods' book "Rollback: Repealing Big Government Before the Coming Fiscal Collapse" where he took a shit all over OSHA.

Work place safety before 1970 sucked. That means as an American worker you could have been exposed to chemicals, fall hazards, etc with little recourse. Food manufacturing had food being contaminated. Before lockout/tag out you had deaths and injuries. I'm working and will see if I can get you info later

I'll have to dig and find his information too, but the point that he was pushing was that work environments were getting better and safer before OSHA and that work place accidents continued to decline after OSHA, only at a slower rate than before OSHA.

_________________
"I supported President Lincoln. I believed his war policy would be the only way to save the country, but I see my mistake. I visited Washington a few weeks ago, and I saw the corruption of the present administration - and so long as Abraham Lincoln and his Cabinet are in power, so long will war continue. And for what? For the preservation of the Constitution and the Union? No, but for the sake of politicians and government contractors." J.P. Morgan, American financier and banker, 1864