Premium
Ethics and Choosing Appropriate Means to an End: Problems with Coal Mine and Nuclear Workplace Safety
Author(s) -
ShraderFrechette Kristin,
Cooke Roger
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
risk analysis
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.972
H-Index - 130
eISSN - 1539-6924
pISSN - 0272-4332
DOI - 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00418.x
Subject(s) - coal mining , forensic engineering , engineering , risk analysis (engineering) , construction engineering , business , coal , waste management
A common problem in ethics is that people often desire an end but fail to take the means necessary to achieve it. Employers and employees may desire the safety end mandated by performance standards for pollution control, but they may fail to employ the means , specification standards, necessary to achieve this end. This article argues that current ( de jure ) performance standards, for lowering employee exposures to ionizing radiation, fail to promote de facto worker welfare, in part because employers and employees do not follow the necessary means (practices known as specification standards) to achieve the end (performance standards) of workplace safety. To support this conclusion, the article argues that (1) safety requires attention to specification, as well as performance, standards; (2) coal‐mine specification standards may fail to promote performance standards; (3) nuclear workplace standards may do the same; (4) choosing appropriate means to the end of safety requires attention to the ways uncertainties and variations in exposure may mask violations of standards; and (5) correcting regulatory inattention to differences between de jure and de facto is necessary for achievement of ethical goals for safety.