> “We cannot allow corporations to put profit over people”
This implies corporations should "put people over profit", which is welfare.
This implies corporations should "put people over profit", which is welfare.
You seem to think the labor market is some sort of textbook-perfect market, where employees have roughly equal power and information as employer. That simply isn't true. Thus we need worker protections. And every time an employer finds a new way to profit off bad behavior, we need to add more protections.
You need to be specific. Injuries? Stress? Responsibility? Overtime? General drudgery? People are paid a salary to do something they wouldn't do otherwise. There is always a downside. Laws exist to limit certain downsides, eg undue physical stress, sexual exploitation or too high a risk of injuries. If that was the actual policy goal, you would not say “We cannot allow corporations to put profit over people”, you would be mentioning a specific downside. Doing otherwise would be dishonest sloganeering.
Fired for no reason=perfectly fine.
Severely injured on the job=can't sue the company in most cases, and have to rely on suppar Workman's Comp.
(I probally left out a lot of Corporate Welfare. It's early. here, and I need to go back to sleep.)