If it is that dangerous, why would you send one your people there? Not a good way to treat your employees. Money over people is not the way to go.
The person in charge doesn't want to disappoint the boss.
So they do whatever is required unless someone dies or gets sexually assaulted.
And to be clear, remediation efforts in modern American workplaces handle things AFTER someone has died or experiences some kind of rape/sexual assault.
The Corporation has to respond or be held liable.
A lawsuit can be settled and you can be sure they have price tags on every single one, pre-determined and set to float along with current market conditions.
At this point most American companies are full of a rot that they began, propagated, and encouraged.
A rot in the core of the workforce that happens when you say point blank "You, your family, and your work, mean nothing and can be thrown away at a moments notice."
They think they were clever by turning workers into a "liquidity" which they can just pump from one Corp to the next.
By putting them all into a spreadsheet and developing ways to mass layoff people without speaking to them individually, the employers have created an environment where they purposefully poisoned the loyalty well.
Somehow they seem to have thought this process would work fine, because America liberated its Women to join the workforce and so now, with a bloated workforce you can pay far less on average, why WOULDN'T you consider all the workers as this grey genderless liquid resource you can pump in and out like ballast in a ship's hold?
But what they're finding, shockingly, is that Women in the American workforce are getting unhappy and disloyal to their employment when they start hitting the end of their natural fertility window.
Many of those successful Women bail on not only a job where you'd need a police escort in Englewood, but on ALL jobs.... including top paid female lawyers whose firms try desperately to keep these talented ladies.
But you know what these smart ladies figured out, much like their peers, albeit much faster (IMO)?
They figured out that working yourself to death (50-80 hrs a week) for a firm or company or corporation which only cares about profits now and profits future, becomes a pointless effort towards shoveling more dollars into the trough.
They figured out that they'd be much happier using their wealth on a simpler, smaller life, where they get to have a family they take care of, not a boss they coddle into his bonus nomnoms.
So now you have this grey genderless blob of workers, and they alienated a good half or more of the Men, because they underpaid us and pretended they could replace us.
And half or more of the Women have either figured out, or are coming to the conclusion that being a slave to a Corporation is far far worse than finding a Man for whom you must make a sandwich so he's got energy to do his job and protect/provide(for) his family.
I've been one of those Corpo wageslaves and I can tell you without a shadow of doubt in my mind.... this system is rotten and collapsing.
If you want a future of work that makes sense I would say this:
A Man has a duty to protect and provide for his family.
An Employer has a duty to protect and provide for its worker, because the workers make up the family which protects and provides for the economic well-being of the employer.
As soon as you cut the bond and say there's no reciprocal duty to one another, a relationship structure fails and the participants fail.
www.16thward.org
