You expect workers to pay for protection out of their own pockets? Against a risk their employer denies exists.

> Now that the danger is known why wouldn't workers protect themselves without government requirements?

At the risk of losing their jobs if they push back 'too much' against the companies. If it's no longer mandatory, lower regulations can be a 'competitive advantage' when it comes to costs, and so that incentivizes companies to cut back.

> Now that the danger is known why wouldn't workers protect themselves without government requirements?

Because workers don't control working conditions.

Let's take a look: * If we accept that it's the workers responsibility then we're saying that the blue collar worker who is barely making enough to feed their family is supposed to travel OSHA warnings and regulations to know that silica dust will cause them problems. * If we accept that it's the businesses responsibility then I'll ask you to provide me of examples where massive mining corporations voluntarily protected their workers when government didn't require it.

Do you really think that either of these two entities will be able to manage this risk more effectively than the government? I don't.

Some of the mitigation techniques aren't feasible for the employees to implement, and some employers would actively stop the employees from implementing them without pressure from sufficiently empowered regulatory bodies to force the employers to implement them.

I'll give you an example. I used to have a job that involved cutting concrete pipes with a saw. The employer provided an N95 mask that kind of worked but didn't really provide proper proper protection. The saw I used had a water hookup that would allow you to connect a water tank to it which would have completely eliminated the dust from forming as the pipe was being cut.

I'm assuming that the law mandated the provision of masks but it did not mandate the use of water when cutting the concrete. As a result the ineffective mask solution was provided by the employer while the effective solution was not.

It would not have been practical for me as an employee to self source a water tank and a water source. Hell this employer couldn't even provide the workers with fresh drinking water all the time, despite the job being the literally installation of water pipes.

Because PPE is uncomfortable and safe practices (including PPE) slow you down. If not forced by management (or the government), many people will do stuff that shortens their lives by 30 years, and push others to do it as well.

Because a lot of preventative measures for this stuff affect how the facility is built and how the process is designed, and an individual worker can't change that.

Because if you're running a business and you don't actively push your workers to cut corners, you will get outcompeted by businesses who do. And then the workers will go work there, because those are the only businesses left and this is the trade they know. And if they try to do it the safe way, they'll get fired because they're 5 (or 25) percent slower than the workers who don't.

Because unions, which might be able to do something about some of those things, are (a) fighting game theory a lot of the time, (b) captured not infrequently, and (c) legally hobbled more often than you'd hope.

All of which is obvious if you're not intentionally trying really hard to ignore it.

Because we know from history that businesses do not take responsibility for safety unless they are required to by government regulations.

Already showing as flagged, alas...