Personally, I think the lawsuit is a good thing. After all, I'm not a fan of tobacco, nor those cigarrette companies. However, a co-worker, who I might add is a non-smoker, said that the waitress should not have received any form of compensation: she should have known the risks of working in an area where cigarette smoke is abundant. And if she were the least concerned about her health, she should have gotten another career. What think you?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"...largely based on the argument employees should not have to be subjected to second-hand smoke."
Well, neither should the rest of us, honestly.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
What are you, some kind of socialist? It's every American's right to exhale whatever he wants.
Posted by E. Cartman (Member # 256) on :
It's also every American's right to inhale whatever he/she wants. Like oxygen, methane, nitrogen, carcinogenic smoke, you name it.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Those two issues, incidently, are at the heart of my libertarian crisis. I mean, in the abstract.
Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :
It is a pathetic load of bullshit....
Now, I should get workmen's comp for having to smell people air fresheners, since a lot of people over do it....
Fucking stupid shit.....
Posted by Tahna Los (Member # 33) on :
Most air fresheners are not carcinogens, Ritten.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
I don't get it, whats the big deal? People get compensation for workplace injuries all the time...how is this any different?
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Most air fresheners are not carcinogens
At least, that's what Glade tells you...
Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :
Diesel exhaust wasn't thought to be either, but it is on the list also...
Military personel around the world can now sue their governments for allowing them to ride in open hatched vehicles that spew forth exhaust. The Zelda class of APCs, used by dozens of countries, have hauled thousands of troops around....
People working near any diesel equipment can now sue their present and previous employeers for this work place hazzard...
If she knew the hazzards, and was too fucking stupid to find a different job, then to hell with her. Using it as a crutch to cover for years of neglect on her financial future is disgusting.
Posted by Tahna Los (Member # 33) on :
We're talking about a closed environment. Unless those guys were using their military vehicles indoors.....
From what I've been told, workers comp is freely available to miners who develop respiratory diseases while working below. I believe the waitress thought this was a similar situation.
It ain't a lawsuit that's for sure.
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
Have you ever been to L.A.? I'd wager the air there is as thick with cancer as any bar I've ever been to.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ritten: People working near any diesel equipment can now sue their present and previous employeers for this work place hazzard... If she knew the hazzards, and was too fucking stupid to find a different job, then to hell with her. Using it as a crutch to cover for years of neglect on her financial future is disgusting.
Dude, one would normally think that people working as a waitress, don't really have much flexibility as to where they work. See, you don't just walk out of a waitress job and oh.....become a CEO. Secondly, the article never says that she sued because she was having financial problems, so thats a big assumption.
It also doesn't matter whether or not you know about the hazards in a work environment in order to apply for workplace compensation. A construction worker working on a high-rise is perfectly aware that he/she could fall and be injured, but should that event occur, it hardly stops someone from getting compensation.
Also, she didn't *sue* anyone. There's a difference between suing an employer and applying for workplace compensation. Not every dispute has to be settled by suing someone or invading a foreign country. Americans.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)