if

[low_delta]

1. Large corporation engages in a practice that results in injuries to a couple of people nationwide every year.

2. Said corporation refuses to discontinue this practice.

3. Person does something with this product which she knows might cause her pain, but in fact results in injury.

4. Said person sues and is awarded major punitive damages.

Would you,
a. shake your head over the sorry state of America?

b. be happy the company got what it deserved?

c. be satisfied that there was a settlement, and try to forget about it.

Comments

[cynnerth.livejournal.com]

Both the defendant and the plaintiff knew there could be injuries...or the defendent knew there could be injuries and the plaintiff only thought there might be pain?

[low-delta.livejournal.com]

Person did not know.

I am uncertain of the seriousness of the injuries that resulted in the warnings to the corporation.

[i.livejournal.com]

this is why there are labels on ladders.

however...

without lawsuits resulting in damages large enough to get a corporation's attention, we would be worse off.

so...

we need judges who recognize and throw out frivolous suits.

i think...

most of the suits that actually get to a jury belong there.

[banana.livejournal.com]

Could be b or c - depends on the other details.

[shoo.livejournal.com]

It sounds to me like both parties knew of the possible hazard.
I am sick of the sue mentality.
I think I need more info but am leaning towards A

[cherie.livejournal.com]

This is exactly why we need laws to protect workers in the workplace. If left to the employer or the corporation as you said above, even though they know there is evidence that proves a past history of potential harm and injuries each year - they choose not to do anything about it. I suspect the damages paid to anyone who dares challenge them is not as much as changing the practice entirely.

Bush has already taken away the rights of employees to sue their employer for certain job injuries. Yes it is true - it is part of the Workmen's Compensation law he passed at the beginning of this year. I will try to find it if anyone is interested. Workers have less and less rights on the job. Remember the law that said your employer didn't have to pay you over time for anything over 8 hours a day because some people wanted to work 10 hours shifts? Well, it punished everyone for that right. Now overtime is often paid only after your 40 or even 50 hour work week is reached - this is definitely a plus for employers as they can work the employee over 8 hours a day without legally having to pay them for over time.

It seems everyone is always thinking the workers of America are trying to get something for nothing, but that is only a minority of people in the work place. Most employees work their fingers to the bone just hoping to keep their puny salaries or hourly wages many times putting themselves in danger of injury. These are facts.

The story goes that many years ago the potato farmers hired workers to pick potatoes and throw them up from a bushel to a conveyor belt on a truck in the field. They worked very hard and showed up early each day. Sometimes the conveyor belt would break down and sometimes even a farm person would lose their arm or life in one of the faulty conveyor belts. But that is another story. The workers were only paid for the bushels they picked and put on the conveyor belt. Well, the conveyor belt would start breaking down and they were docked pay or not paid at all for any time the equipment did not work. It could be half a days work out the window or hours of standing around waiting for the equipment to start up again. Finally someone said - I think these people need representation, and that was the beginning of the union representation of American workers. Personally, I feel if anyone sees a reason why these workers didn't need some representation - then they are ignorant fools.

[vlinker.livejournal.com]

the worker's comp law has always protected the employer from suits by employees for all job injuries......Bush did not dream this up........before there was a workers comp system, if you were injured on the job, you had to sue your employer to get any compensation, and of course, if you had no money, you couldn't afford a lawyer......

where i work, overtime is paid for work performed in excess of 8 hours in a day and 40 hours in a pay week........the flex time issue, say people wanting to work 4 tens and have a 3 day weekend must be watched carefully to insure that laws are not being broken.....i do not believe that labor can be worked a 50 hour week without 10 of those hours being compensated at the overtime rate.....now, "professional" labor such as PE's etc can be worked at a fixed hourly rate or at a salaried rate.....ô

[seamusd.livejournal.com]

b

[sirreal13.livejournal.com]

All of the above...

[vlinker.livejournal.com]

i do not see enough information in the problem#

[eyelid.livejournal.com]

A.

People suck.