Posted on 07/08/2004 8:32:22 AM PDT by ppaul
Probably true, but that doesn't mean that contractors should be allowed to operate without liability insurance.
The first law of dynamite is, "If you can see it, you're too close."
Forgive this ignorant Protestant of the Reformed Faith, but i'd have thought in the case of Nuns that the knuckles were definately in jepordy by rapid contact with steel rulers. ;^)
This article really stuned my beeber...
" In California you could go to jail for that."
Not entirely true, i've always made my employees adhear to safety laws but I flat won't obay them personally and have told OSHA inspectors to take a flying leap at a rolling donut since as an owner they can't touch me for endangering my own live. I've dared them to cite me and the won't do it since they know they would lose, especially since i've exempted myself from comp insurance my entire life.
The smaller the understanding, the greater the concern.
You've fraudulently misreported hours for worker's comp insurance?
I wonder how many FREEPERS are really into home birth and putting 11 year olds on top of houses that are being moved down the street?
This guy seems to think that his right to raise his kids and run a business involves no responsibilities to ensure that those kids are not endangered.
Similarly, his "flexible" approach to dealing with insurance and workers comp. shows that he wants all of the benefits of running a business, but that he doesn't care too much about the responsibilities.
It's sort of like bizarro libertarianism.
Um, did you even read what the heck I posted? No, apparently not. Perhaps someone needs to spend 10 minutes with you.
"You've fraudulently misreported hours for worker's comp insurance?"
Not at all, family members can exempt themselves and a corporation with 5 or less stockholders, the owners can exempt themselfs legally.
I was talking about underreporting of payroll for workers' compensation. That's a five year prison term in California.
What we have here is a conflict of first-interest; to what extent does the state's franchise trump the freedom of the parent or the child?
If it is imputed by association and licensure the contract is made; if it is denied implicitly and factually the state must prove its case.
Sounds like the guy is too cheap to hire real workers.
"The boys, 13 and 11 at the time, were riding on the peak of a house as it moved down the street, callers reported, pushing up low-hanging traffic lights. They were flagging traffic at construction sites, driving bulldozers and backhoes, and they seldom if ever wore protective gear. Fueling fears for the boys' safety, a backhoe flipped with Zach inside."
Liability insurance has as much to with safety as an umbrella on a windy day has to do with staying dry.
You're confusing responsibilities with duties.
I'm comfortable with giving the state the power to step in and prevent parents from having their kids engage in physically dangerous activities. By physically dangerous, I don't mean activities that might lead to cuts, bruises or potentially broken bones, but activities that can potentially cause major injuries or death.
Allowing kids to work on construction sites clearly falls under this definition.
If it is imputed by association and licensure the contract is made; if it is denied implicitly and factually the state must prove its case.
I'm not sure I follow.
Your issues with this are clearly yours.......Stay safe !
Uh Oh!
You make a good point but my read of the article was that the kid was on top of a wagon pushing low hanging stop lights out of the way. Didn't read the directing traffic item, perhaps I am wrong. Then again, this is a rural community, so keep that in mind.
I kind of agree that this is hardly much different than the farm work that kids do, driving tractors, pulling hay wagons, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.