This bill bans local ordinances on water breaks, but there are still federal (and likely state) laws that still require it. You can see right on OSHA’s site here.
OSHA Standards require an employer to provide potable water in the workplace and permit employees to drink it. Potable water includes tap water that is safe for drinking. Employers cannot require employees to pay for water that is provided. An employer does not have to provide bottled water if potable water is available. See OSHA’s sanitation standard for more information.
Why can’t people report on GOP bills objectively, rather than misconstruing them as hard as possible?
They aren’t, the law is about consistency of regulations for regional companies. Have you worked for a sub contractor that has to have different policies in every city they work in?
Objectivity is difficult when your empanada hookup’s husband died in this heat.
I didn’t know the family well, let alone the husband, but their family is in mourning because of laws like these.
There is blood on Abbot’s (and his ilk’s) hands and that family will likely never see justice served. So do tell me how laws, even federal laws, protect us if they are not actively enforced?
The article mentions 11 people, only 4 of which died on the job. The rest were either outside, at home, or were imates in prison. Notice the wording used in the headline too, “11 Texans die after”, not “11 Texans die FROM”.
Since then, 11 people between the ages of 60 and 80 have died of heat-related illness in Webb County, the Associated Press reported. Most did not have air-conditioning in their homes. A teen and stepfather died while hiking in extreme heat at Big Bend National Park, per a National Park Service release. According to the Texas Tribune, at least nine inmates, including two men in their 30s, died in Texas prisons that lack air conditioning. And at least four workers have died after collapsing while laboring in triple-digit heat: a post office worker in Dallas, a utility lineman in East Texas, and construction workers in Houston and San Antonio.
It’s just pure disingenuous behavior. There’s plenty of legitimate reasons to hate Abbot, this comes off as manipulation.
And people wonder why there’s so much distrust in media.
They died from the laws that are still in effect until Abbot’s bill takes over in September. Why see you blaming that bill when it has nothing to do with these deaths?
I didn’t blame the bill, I only pointed out how callous you were being by saying that these deaths are nothing to worry about.
This bill is not the cause of those deaths, however the bill (in my opinion) won’t do anything other than cause more suffering. When someone makes a complaint instead of it going to a local authority who would have the resources and bodies to investigate the company, that conversation will become “oh sorry nothing we can do, talk to OSHA and then wait for 3 months for a response where they tell you they may look into it!”
What benefit comes out of restricting local jurisdiction’s ability to pass laws requiring extra water breaks? What gets my goat is that the only benefit I could reasonably see is increased corporate profits at the cost of human well-being.
We’re living in a time where the people want to get their news in 15 second chunks, and think they understand a complex situation instantly.
We’re also living in a time where social media leans heavily left.
These combined encourage young left wing people to be drawn to and vocalize their perceived expertise, when in reality they have absolutely no clue of the situation beyond what their 15 second attention span can gather.
This “article” also doesn’t mention a single death due to being deprived of a water break. There’s zero mention of anyone asking for and being denied water. Some of the deaths were hikers. It’s “water breaks were banned” and then “people died,” and nobody’s reading the article to find out those two statements are tied together for sensationalism alone. Nobody was denied a water break and died because of it. Lame journalism.
This bill bans local ordinances on water breaks, but there are still federal (and likely state) laws that still require it. You can see right on OSHA’s site here.
https://www.osha.gov/faq
Why can’t people report on GOP bills objectively, rather than misconstruing them as hard as possible?
Removed by mod
They aren’t, the law is about consistency of regulations for regional companies. Have you worked for a sub contractor that has to have different policies in every city they work in?
Objectivity is difficult when your empanada hookup’s husband died in this heat.
I didn’t know the family well, let alone the husband, but their family is in mourning because of laws like these.
There is blood on Abbot’s (and his ilk’s) hands and that family will likely never see justice served. So do tell me how laws, even federal laws, protect us if they are not actively enforced?
The article mentions 11 people, only 4 of which died on the job. The rest were either outside, at home, or were imates in prison. Notice the wording used in the headline too, “11 Texans die after”, not “11 Texans die FROM”.
It’s just pure disingenuous behavior. There’s plenty of legitimate reasons to hate Abbot, this comes off as manipulation.
And people wonder why there’s so much distrust in media.
The deaths happening show that the heat is lethal. The ban on water breaks is only going to kill MORE people.
How are they going to kill more people? Workers already have a federally mandated right to have access to water. You are spreading misinformation.
It’s just 9 human beings and 4 other human beings dying in the heat, what’s to worry about?
They died from the laws that are still in effect until Abbot’s bill takes over in September. Why see you blaming that bill when it has nothing to do with these deaths?
I didn’t blame the bill, I only pointed out how callous you were being by saying that these deaths are nothing to worry about. This bill is not the cause of those deaths, however the bill (in my opinion) won’t do anything other than cause more suffering. When someone makes a complaint instead of it going to a local authority who would have the resources and bodies to investigate the company, that conversation will become “oh sorry nothing we can do, talk to OSHA and then wait for 3 months for a response where they tell you they may look into it!” What benefit comes out of restricting local jurisdiction’s ability to pass laws requiring extra water breaks? What gets my goat is that the only benefit I could reasonably see is increased corporate profits at the cost of human well-being.
We’re living in a time where the people want to get their news in 15 second chunks, and think they understand a complex situation instantly.
We’re also living in a time where social media leans heavily left.
These combined encourage young left wing people to be drawn to and vocalize their perceived expertise, when in reality they have absolutely no clue of the situation beyond what their 15 second attention span can gather.
This “article” also doesn’t mention a single death due to being deprived of a water break. There’s zero mention of anyone asking for and being denied water. Some of the deaths were hikers. It’s “water breaks were banned” and then “people died,” and nobody’s reading the article to find out those two statements are tied together for sensationalism alone. Nobody was denied a water break and died because of it. Lame journalism.