1) A significant number of employers pay the bare minimum for worker safety [hence OSHA violations being relevant, such companies clearly exist and some miscalculate. I doubt these people are malicious, merely misjudged the minimum]
2) Life insurance policies being paid out on employees creates further incentive to do the bare minimum to comply with OSHA. In addition to not having to spend additional $$s on safety training & equipment, you now also have an investment vehicle to reinforce this behavior.
3) Many companies have more than 65% of their workforce [construction for instance] doing work in situations that require safety training & equipment. The limitation is based on a payroll %.
I'm confused why this requires spelling out this verbosely, but there it is.
Notice how at no point am I saying any of the stuff you are claiming I am?
So I'm just confused how he could read it that way. But alright, I guess it is on me to be clearer then. :P
I find this argument approximately as credible as the one that says that, having taken out a life insurance policy on employees, the company now has an incentive to have those employees murdered.
And again: aren't they disallowed from taking out policies on anyone outside the top 35% best paid employees? What are the OSHA concerns for office workers?