Road trip

[orthodoc]

That's precisely the sort of thing that the current company administration has gone to great lengths to prevent. A few decades ago there were cases of illness in the community. Now there are protocols in place that I've never seen or read about anywhere else, and they are successful. There hasn't been a case of community illness in several decades. The company monitors air, water, and soil, and as long as employees follow protocols the risk of contamination is minuscule. Employees who don't follow protocols are terminated. I'm not sure what more can be done barring new information that would indicate further measures. If such became available I believe the company would immediately do what was necessary, because that's their track record.

Lamp, I'm sympathetic with your suggestions. However, there is no day-care in the middle of the production areas - possibly because toddlers are impossible to fit properly for respirators and won't keep them on, unlike adult employees. They also won't keep gloves on or follow donning/doffing protocols. Adults, properly educated, will do those things.

There is a demand for this product, and someone will supply it. This company has turned an unacceptable situation around and far outdoes the federal government in its exposure standards. A very few employees are still affected in spite of best efforts. The dilemma is, do we support the efforts of a company that has done far more than any coal mining company to prevent disease, or do we drive this production underground - effectively to other countries whose governments won't require any protection, who will regard the sacrifice of workers' lives as justified? Neither you nor I think that way. To abolish the product would be to do away with many aspects of our current lives and of all future aerospace/space development. Some would see that as acceptable, but those with money and power think otherwise. And, did any progress toward improved comfort, safety, and development ever fail to involve risk?

I know - the question is, who bears that risk on behalf of humankind. Yet someone always does because the humans with power demand it. My job is to minimize the risk and compensate those who take it. Even if my preference would be to live as the monks of Mt Athos do, without technology, eating vegetables, with no diabetes or cancer or heart disease, that's not the preference of most North Americans. They prefer to balance risk with perceived benefit.