In the seventies a terrible accident occurred on a ship docked at the Eni island port of Gela.
An oil tanker went up in flames, thirteen workers burned like torches: the burns that kept some victims alive for hours, for them the end was a liberation from unspeakable suffering.
They were admitted to the Gela hospital, then housed in the old monastery in the historic center, a structure that did not have the tools to treat or alleviate the suffering of burn victims. The episode aroused pain and anger, but nothing like the reactions recorded today due also to a much higher incidence of accidents at work, so much so that it provoked a strong response from the workers’ union, Uil and CGIL. ahead.
According to the latest Istat report, workplace accidents in Italy show a slight decrease in percentage terms compared to previous years, but the absolute number remains alarming with thousands of accidents every year, including hundreds of fatal cases. This data not only reflects working conditions, but also the effectiveness of safety policies adopted by companies and government authorities.
The exponential growth of fatal accidents on construction sites closely follows the growth of construction sites, so it is possible to assume that the dangers for workers in factories and construction have always been high due to an absence of supervision and control on the part of the relevant authorities . The protection of workers has never been at the top of governments’ minds.
To give a measure of government sensitivity, the scale of dangers proclaimed by some of the political forces has prevailed, the one that has been warning Italians for thirty years that the greatest security risks come from the arrival of exiles from non-European countries.
When the massacre occurred in the port of Gela, and this allows us to read the past, the Sunday television format entrusted to Dario Fo, full of (desecrating) satire, was stopped suddenly and the authors were asked to step aside because a sketch it told of an industrial accident that occurred in a canned meat factory.
Having been killed by the machine used to macerate the meat, the unfortunate person ends up in the concoction ready for canning, without the production cycle being stopped so as not to lose the product. Who got to eat the poor remains of the worker sacrificed for the sake of profit, Dario Fo seemed to ask himself with the intention of shaking the consciences of his time. Macabre satire, no doubt, but useful for highlighting cynicism and the corporate sensitivities of the time.
More than a thousand deaths since the beginning of the year – in factories and on construction sites today – warn us that the prevailing lobbies, political and otherwise, keep the level of surveillance low on the one hand and create diversions on the other. The danger of black skin , of fundamentalist Islam at the gates, of the importation of diseases and crime, at the box office of consensus people pay cash when they enter the polls.
The corporate cynicism of the seventies and that of those who create diversions to the detriment of safety are still there, if anything the way in which the issue of safety in the workplace is kept on the margins has changed.
Let’s be clear, the company is born and grows by making profits, criminalizing profits means fundamentally changing the social, economic and political system of the country. An alternative that is not at all safe, indeed full of risks for freedom and democracy, as demonstrated by the experiences of communist regimes, tyrannies in which the riches are in the hands of the rulers and hybrid regimes (Chinese capitalist communism) that open the doors to an oligarchy which obeys the single party. Furthermore, the entrepreneurial world is varied and cannot be represented as a monolith with a single thought.
There are entrepreneurs who invest in the safety and social well-being of workers, benefiting from the quality of production, management economies and earnings, and others who implement a risky savings policy, especially on construction sites, and there is also large ones which, by authorizing cascade subcontracting, disperses responsibilities into a thousand streams.
The lack of adequate investments in safety can lead to serious accidents, which in addition to seriously damaging the health of workers, can lead to high costs in terms of legal damages, loss of productivity and damage to the company image.
Current legislation, which allows the extensive use of subcontracting, often contributes to a dilution of responsibilities regarding safety at work. This system of cascading subcontracting can make it difficult to identify who is truly responsible for working conditions, complicating efforts to ensure the safety and well-being of workers.
Accidents at work therefore continue to represent one of the major problems in the industrial sector, highlighting a significant discrepancy between companies that invest in worker safety and well-being and those that prefer risky savings policies. The recent tragedy at the hydroelectric power plant is a dramatic example.
Companies that have chosen to significantly invest in the safety of their workers see notable improvements in reduced injuries, greater employee satisfaction and productivity, and lower long-term costs due to absences and lawsuits.
These benefits translate into a better corporate reputation and substantial economic advantages, highlighting how safety is not only an ethical issue but also an economically advantageous one. On the contrary, companies that follow a cost cutting policy often find themselves facing greater risks.
To effectively address the issue of workplace accidents, it is essential that companies recognize the economic and human benefits of investments in safety. Furthermore, a review of the legislation is necessary to tighten the mesh of the subcontracting system and ensure a clear attribution of responsibilities regarding safety at work.
Only through a joint commitment between government and businesses and targeted legislation will it be possible to significantly reduce the number of accidents at work and improve the quality of life of workers. Security should not be seen as a cost, but as a fundamental investment for the future of companies and society as a whole.
We are all called to vigilance and awareness. Suffering from cynical and false communication about those who flee their country due to hunger is a lie that ultimately also justifies the desertion of the control authorities from their jobs. There is the responsibility of the ordinary citizen if it has been successful and if work sites and factories are not adequately subjected to safety checks.
