Are you coming to bed?
I can't. This is important.
Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD
As for children working in the old days, this was culturally acceptable and something that low wage families needed(and frankly still need) to move ahead in the world. By the time it was against the law it no longer was. Making the law itself pointless.
Wanting courts to handle these kind of cases is not saying anything of the sort. Its actually accepting this reality and putting up a solution that offers the workers a way to deal with it.Read about employers hiring thugs to keep employees in line with beatings and MURDERS...after that its very easy to understand why we need OASHA and a structure to oversee business...theres actually some individuals on this forum who act like there are no lowlife scumbag businessman....I have to chuckle sometimes at the naivette or the disengenuousness.
Last edited by Henrin; 10-07-11 at 12:48 PM.
Last edited by Henrin; 10-07-11 at 12:58 PM.
Under most conditions regulations should disincentivize abusing others.
Sure it's all how you define abuse, that's what we do though, make big-boy decisions about what's abuse and what's not abuse. Most lay people can figure out the difference.
Regarding courts handling it, that's absurd. I don't want to sue AFTER I get cancer from a known carcinogen being hidden away in my shower gel. Certain things are priceless, a law suit can't give you back your child, your health, your life, etc. Get a clue please. Legal should be a last resort. That's when all other negotations and avenues have failed. Thankfully, because it's extraordinarily inefficient to boot (court).Originally Posted by Henrin
Last edited by Mach; 10-07-11 at 12:58 PM.