Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I agree that there should be a way, but there absolutely is not.
There should be. Could get creative. Eventually the law recognized take home exposure duty for asbestos product sellers. The problem with going after the employer is that any action for injuries derivative from an employee-employer relationship is limited to the exclusive jurisdiction of workers' comp., which absolutely does not cover take-home exposure.
There is always negligence, though. Everyone is liable for the foreseeable, actual harms of their conduct, or said another way, every person owes a duty to all other persons to use reasonable care to avoid causing injury. I guess that claim would get hung up on the medical proof of causation; how could a doctor say the work exposure was the one that caused the disease when the whole state was setting records. Maybe on the right facts, as is always the case for new precedent.