Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Texas rules requiring water breaks for construction workers will be nullified

texastribune.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 140 posts

Re: Texas rules requiring water breaks for construction workers will be nullified

#111

Post by mustacheemperor »

fwlr wrote: post #104
tzs wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps that is the best argument for removing these laws. OSHA has a lot of expertise in managing the balance of safety and productivity, so they should be the ones in charge of deciding on how often and how mandatory heat breaks should be. That was covered in the article: --begin quote-- David Michaels, who was head of OSHA from 2009 to 2017, disagreed with the approach of HB 2127 proponents. “Under OSHA law, it…

Realistically, no, it wouldn’t be a problem for this case. I was charitably trying to come up with the strongest possible argument for the repeal bill. I think it’s a decent argument in the general case - it’s not hard to see how hard-and-fast rules made by politicians serving the two masters of worker safety and popular vote could stack up to cause death by a thousand cuts. Especially if trying to repeal any of thos…

Your assumptions are just mistaken. I got my California OSHA 10 construction safety card within the last few months, and heat related illness prevention - which is not somehow semantically separate from heat exposure - is not part of federal OSHA guidelines. It is an additional part of California’s state guidelines, and that’s probably why you see posters on google. Texas could add similar requirements at the state level, but like many states, they haven’t. I watched a whole slideshow module, and passed the quiz, specifically about how the heat safety regulations I was being certified for were California state specific!

You can just check the federal OSHA regulations for yourself: https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/19...

I am certainly in the camp that Federal OSHA should be amended to include heat safety, but I can see how that would be challenging to do with America’s varied climates. Australia maybe and probably is different but whatever you experienced in Australia won’t be an accurate reference in the US, “OSHA” is the occupational safety and health administration of the United States. Anecdotally, I’ve heard australia has stricter construction workplace safety laws.

The state bill nullifies all local ordinances that introduce mandatory breaks, and that will include ordinances requiring construction workers get water breaks.

Re: Texas rules requiring water breaks for construction workers will be nullified

#112

Post by kthejoker2 »

infamouscow wrote: post #94
kthejoker2 wrote: post #73

Okay guys, focus on the real issue here, which is Texas state government is Republican, but every major Texas city is Democratic. So rural Texas bumpkins want to impose a rule of law on their economic engines (while conveniently decrying interference from federal agencies on things like policing, voting rights, LGBTQ discrimination, border policy, etc) This is two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner, while…

Economic activity does not equate to political worth. Although cities may be the economic hubs it doesn't equate to the political worth or value of an individuals vote. Everyone regardless of where they live or their economic contribution should be entitled to an equal vote in a fair and democratic society. One of the original concerns about direct democracy is the potential it has to allow a majority of voters to tr…

Thanks for agreeing with me?

The issue is city populations are the minority here. The laws they passed only apply to their cities.

Their right to self govern is being overridden by the majority state legislature.

You are literally arguing my point but you don't seem to understand whose protections are being trampled on by whom.

Re: Texas rules requiring water breaks for construction workers will be nullified

#114

Post by rightbyte »

throw0101a wrote: post #105
rightbyte wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I assume the workers are able to drink any time they want? "The law will nullify ordinances enacted by Austin in 2010 and Dallas in 2015 that established 10-minute breaks every four hours so that construction workers can drink water and protect themselves from the sun." Like, every 4th hour? You need to drink maybe every 15th minute if it is hot and you work with your body. I smell a forced water break to ensure…

> Yes. I assume the workers are able to drink any time they want? What about on the other end (i.e., peeing)? "14-hour days and no bathroom breaks: Amazon's overworked delivery drivers": * https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/mar/11/amazon-de... "Amazon strikes: Workers claim their toilet breaks are timed": * https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64384287 I wouldn't put it past some employers preventing water inta…

Ye well if you can't go pee at will a mandated brake every 4 hours won't save you underwear.

I believe "reasonable breaks" is a worker community and employer problem rather than a government one. It depends so much on the situation that general rules get worthless.

But I am all for a loose enough "right to pee and drink" law if it is a practical problem at some employers.

Re: Texas rules requiring water breaks for construction workers will be nullified

#115

Post by fallingknife »

jmclnx wrote: post #10
paulryanrogers wrote: post #2

Quite a horrific solution to a concern about variance among local governments. Perhaps they truly believe the market will solve work concerns / deaths, despite past evidence that they get brushed aside.

More than that, the Real Market (Earth) may solve this issue for good, when Texas regularly hits Wet Bulb Temp due to Climate Change, people will start heading north. So no more Texas. This is crazy, I am sure the Lawyers are now looking closely to Case Law to e ready when the suite start flying.

In that case water breaks will make no difference

Re: Texas rules requiring water breaks for construction workers will be nullified

#116

Post by Timon3 »

ESTheComposer wrote: post #107
flangola7 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Between being queer and having a trans daughter, I feel far less worried that the government will arbitrarily impoverish, imprison, or kill me, or kidnap my children. Or that one of the locals will take it upon themselves to do so. I don't care if the rent in Texas was negative.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever of this randomly happening without a crime being committed?

Since they are trying to make "receiving trans healthcare" a crime, technically no. Functionally it's the same thing.

Re: Texas rules requiring water breaks for construction workers will be nullified

#117

Post by Timon3 »

rightbyte wrote: post #114
throw0101a wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes. I assume the workers are able to drink any time they want? What about on the other end (i.e., peeing)? "14-hour days and no bathroom breaks: Amazon's overworked delivery drivers": * https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/mar/11/amazon-de... "Amazon strikes: Workers claim their toilet breaks are timed": * https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64384287 I wouldn't put it past some employers preventing water inta…

Ye well if you can't go pee at will a mandated brake every 4 hours won't save you underwear. I believe "reasonable breaks" is a worker community and employer problem rather than a government one. It depends so much on the situation that general rules get worthless. But I am all for a loose enough "right to pee and drink" law if it is a practical problem at some employers.

> Ye well if you can't go pee at will a mandated brake every 4 hours won't save you underwear

What? Of course it will. If I have the option to go pee every 4 hours it's a heck of a lot better for me and my underwear than if I only have the option every 10 hours.

Re: Texas rules requiring water breaks for construction workers will be nullified

#118

Post by Timon3 »

CodeTheInternet wrote: post #113

I'm confused why there is even a law for this. Is there a law for bathroom breaks as well? Do t let any company treat you as less than a human being.

Yes, there is, because companies would treat people as poorly as possible if it increases profits. Just look at the pee break situation at Amazon.

Don't forget, companies kill people to increase their profits. There is nothing humane or good about our economy.

Re: Texas rules requiring water breaks for construction workers will be nullified

#119

Post by avgcorrection »

rightbyte wrote: post #114
throw0101a wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes. I assume the workers are able to drink any time they want? What about on the other end (i.e., peeing)? "14-hour days and no bathroom breaks: Amazon's overworked delivery drivers": * https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/mar/11/amazon-de... "Amazon strikes: Workers claim their toilet breaks are timed": * https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64384287 I wouldn't put it past some employers preventing water inta…

Ye well if you can't go pee at will a mandated brake every 4 hours won't save you underwear. I believe "reasonable breaks" is a worker community and employer problem rather than a government one. It depends so much on the situation that general rules get worthless. But I am all for a loose enough "right to pee and drink" law if it is a practical problem at some employers.

> Ye well if you can't go pee at will a mandated brake every 4 hours won't save you underwear.

So to sum up.

- Demanding a water break every four hours is useless because you need to drink every 15 minutes in this context

- Demanding a pee break every four hours is useless because… everyone has tiny bladders, I guess? This little pitiful rule is not better than having to go whole shifts without being able to pee?

I guess mandated lunch breaks are useless as well since you need to eat every hour at least under such strenuous conditions. Bah.

> But I am all for a loose enough "right to pee and drink" law if it is a practical problem at some employers.

It certainly must be “loose enough”. Thou shalt never inconvenience corporate management.

Re: Texas rules requiring water breaks for construction workers will be nullified

#120

Post by whycombagator »

BaseballPhysics wrote: post #109
whycombagator wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven’t seen it either. Where have you seen or heard about it?

Sure, fine, I'll do the googling for you: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/texas/article/Even... > That kind of heat exhaustion is common for construction workers in Texas, nearly 40 percent of whom say they are not given regular breaks on job sites, even in the heat of the summer, according to surveys by the Workers Defense Project. ... > According to a Workers Defense Project report from 2017, more than a…

Thanks for that. The worker in the article doesn’t say that a foreman forced her to work without a break explicitly:

> Cruz, 46, said she had not been able to take a break all day because of the pressure to finish the job

The article also links a report I can’t download due to too many redirects so I’m not able to determine how many workers were surveyed etc

Post reply on HN