So there was a $145K fine this month from OSHA. A regulation was in place. It was violated by Caterpillar Inc. A worker fell into a 2000F cauldron of molten metal and was immediately incinerated. At a pittance of cost to the at-fault employer.
But the regulators are “vindicated”. The workers comp benefit will be/has been paid which fully covers the liability exposure to Cat and exculpates it from legal action by the worker's family. And, of course, Social Security will pay survivor bennies.
The only general exceptions to the current bar of suing the employer is if it can be proven to be an intentional act (such as purposefully malicious), or if the employer has foolishly not paid premiums for coverage under workers comp insurance. These are very high legal hurdles in the former case, and very rare circumstances in the latter case.
Everybody washes their hands, including those who think the Regulatory State is the “logical” way to prevent death and injury. As if printing a regulation in the Federal Register guarantees compliance, even by a Fortune 500 company.
The rest of us realize the tort system would have levied a MUCH larger burden on the negligent in these cases: The Employer. Assuming no off-setting contributory negligence on the fallen’s part, likely 10 times or more than the penalty (which the family of the dead worker doesn't get to keep, by the way).
Under the "Norm Regulatory System" (lawsuits), good employers get rewarded because they have limited their exposure by being less negligent. Duh. Checks & Balances.
Bad employers pay cash money for their sloppiness, perhaps wither away from incompetence, even go out of business. Economic Darwinism, if regulations didn't block negligence actions in court. Crummy companies get pounded. Well-run companies avoid jury trials.
The rest of us (consumers/taxpayers) are paying a chunk of the workers comp claim and the social security benefits going to the departed's family. That’s wrong. We didn't cause his death. So we would be taxed less at the register and on our 1040 if lawsuits were allowed.
Cat gets away with a minor fine that is likely less than the cost of the corrective equipment. That’s wrong. The tort system would reduce the size and cost of OSHA. They could be like the fire department and simply inspect and recommend, at much less cost to the taxpayers.
To compare: Volvo didn’t wait for NHTSA to mandate automobile crash-testing results to some theoretical standard. It simply decided to reduce the bloodbath in case of collision for those seeking such a vehicle. It was rewarded by the marketplace segment which valued that aspect of a car.
The market system doesn’t work well with a blanket of unnecessary and ineffective regulation which smothers innovation, reduces corporate exposure for incompetence, and blocks individuals from seeking commensurate compensation for their losses.
