OSHA supporters often suggest that workers systematically underestimate the true amount of
risk that they face on the job. If a new worker asks his or her employer about the probability
of a job-related injury or fatality, it is not uncommon for employers to state that people are
only injured when they are careless or do not follow the firm's safety procedures. Since most
workers believe that they are more careful than the "average" worker, workers in high-risk
occupations believe that they are getting high wages while facing only a moderate level of risk.
OSHA supporters argue that OSHA regulations reduce the level of risk closer to that which
workers would have preferred if they had perfect information about the level of risk.
Even if workers are aware of the risk they face, an argument for OSHA regulations can also be
based on the negative externalities associated with job-related injuries or deaths. While each
worker might select a combination of risk and wages that is optimal given only his or her own
costs and benefits, this choice does not take into account the external costs imposed on others when
a work-related injury or death occurs in the workplace. The existence of these negative
externalities provides another argument for the existence of OSHA regulations designed to
reduce job risk.
In general, supporters of OSHA argue that the benefits from saving lives and reducing
work-related injuries outweigh the costs. OSHA critics argue that the costs resulting from
OSHA regulations outweigh the benefits.
