I'm not quite sure what you are saying here, but if someone hasn't noticed that most workers take unnecessary risks rather than deal with even slight discomfort, and that it is nearly impossible for management to get workers to take safety or environmental concerns seriously, I seriously doubt that they have ever been near an actual workplace. As for a vote on the subject - if you ever managed to get a vote at all, 98% of the crew would not consider it binding - would even be offended that you thought it might be binding.

In short, management can spend a LOT of effort and even a LOT of money trying to encourage safe and environmentally responsible work practices - and get nowhere. Why on earth would anyone expect things to turn out better when no one was offering workers incentives to act responsibly? It makes me think that someone making such claims has never had personal contact with ordinary workers, and that their opinion is based on wishful thinking rather than empirical evidence.

Of course, the other half of this is that the safe and environmentally responsible work practices take more time - and time is valuable when it comes to production. When you figure in the danger of automobile accidents while commuting, then based on the amount of work done per injury many of the safety protocols may make workers LESS safe. The workers who ignore safety protocols are not even necessarily wrong.

I don't think it's an upturned nose attitude to note what happens in the real world. Some people would even think it was the opposite.

I haven't paid much attention to Trump's speeches so I can't comment on them.




Baldur