Worker Compensation - Case Study Example

In essence, the inhalation of this element over prolonged periods makes it a leading cause of cancer especially lung cancer. Moreover, the European Union has banned all use of this material in the industrial and manufacturing sector within the European Union community. It has also banned all use of this mineral in the mining and extraction of the same. In essence, asbestos is the preferred element because of its high resistance to heat, electrical current, chemical, and its tensile abilities.

These attribute make the element desirable by manufacturers. However, many claims of asbestos related cancer claims have led to the inclusion of treatment for those found to have these cancers. This has led to the formulation of various laws that seek to protect workers who work within asbestos prone areas. The effects of asbestos become visible after fifteen to twenty years of exposure to these mineral. Therefore, this essay will delve on whether it is viable for an employee to seek treatment compensation after acquiring lung cancer from working in an asbestos factory.

Worker’s compensation forms an essential part of part of establishing treatment for lung cancer caused by exposure to asbestos for long periods. Ideally, worker compensation laws protect employees to acquire injuries within the workforce in that they do not use their own money fro treatment and recuperation. Their objective is to ensure that employees who become disfigured in any way while on the line duty obtain monetary tokens to eliminate the risk of the company attracting unnecessary lawsuits.

The compensation varies depending on the cause and the negligence of the company’s employees. In essence, an employee disabled within a company receives two-thirds of their salary and may receive more compensation if they were the sole bread winners for their families or having people who depended on them. Additionally, the compensation is a result of the resulting loss of employment either temporarily or permanently or due the medical expenses that one may incur during their seeking of medical attention.

In my view, compensation to employees who gets cancer as a result of working in an asbestos company is a right that no company should deprive an individual. The task of ensuring that a claimant acquires compensation is charged to the state’s agency on administration. Its task is to ensure that the injured employees acquire their entitled benefits at the required time. On the contrary, it is a mandatory requirement for a company to have insurance for its workers to ensure that they make due payments as required in case such an accident occurs to its employees.

On the contrary, a company that exercises extreme caution when it comes to employee safety tends to have minimal worker compensation costs and cases unlike those that do not exercise the same. On the other hand, asbestos related lawsuits have experienced a decrease since the introduction of worker compensation for those that experience injuries while working. In addition, asbestos exposure may also be second hand for the families that these workers go home to (Chung & Voses, 2008). This has been due to research made in recent years that show that these families have the risk of being exposure again to asbestos.

These claims come from the individuals that work within asbestos companies interacts with. This is because of the dust that they pick from the companies and allow them to inhale when they come in to contact with them. However, these claims may provide a basis for future litigations if proper sealing of loopholes does not apply. According to Voses (2008), exposure may be through getting in contact with the clothes of those that work within the asbestos. This because of their minute