a resolution to ban road work during the hours of 6-9 am and 2:30-6:30 pm
Debate Rounds (2)
the hours of 6-9am and 2:30-6:30pm shall hensforth be known as rush hours...or the hours of the day when there is the most traffic on roads.
seeing as how there are more people on the roads at these times, it only makes sence that there is more threat of accident posed on anyone on the road at these times. the risk is never gone, but at these times it increases.
road construction during these hours causes citizens whos job function/ school function is valuable to society to be late to said work/ school there in causing said person to not carry out that function as efficiently or effectively.
obviously we have to have road construction...so here is my proposition...in some large cities those employed for road construction use large gererator powered lights to see in some of the later hours of the evening.
working until 9 oclock instead of 5 and reducing the danger risk is definently worth it...this is my intro to explain the case...i look forward to debating this case.
�I have a question where are you getting your numbers? You make many statements, but provide no support for them.
In response to the dangers of driving through a construction zone I have to say the construction workers are much more likely to be killed in an accident or seriously harmed in an accident than someone driving a car. Construction workers account for 1 in 5 workplace deaths (Work Injury Statistics). Therefore, we should take steps to protect them. By making the work until 9pm (when it is dark) makes drivers less likely to see them and puts workers further at risk.
Furthermore, evening hour work quality is less effective and therefore takes more time. Floodlights aren't as effective as daylight and night shadows make precision work more challenging (Fontaine). Also, later in the year we couldn't be able to do necessary construction, such as paving roads, because cooler temperatures make this impossible (Fontaine).
The cost of fixing roads on nights and weekends is about 30% higher than fixing them during the daylight and weekdays. These costs of course are paid from the cities coffers which the taxpayers fill. The floodlights use electricity and are pricey equipment which leads to higher costs. Costs are also increased for paying workers. These costs are higher on weekends and evenings (Fontaine).
Breaking up the hours in which a construction crew can work also downs productivity. If you have "6-9am and 2:30-6:30pm" as the hours in which a crew can't work it results in a 4 hour morning/afternoon slot and a 2.5 hour evening slot (assuming we stick to your 9pm stop time). Crews would have to setup and take down every few hours like this. We would spend more time paying them to set-up and take down than to actually work (set-up can't be avoided as its required to protect the workers).
I see these costs as more important than a little slowdown time for drivers. While it can be frustrating to be in rush hour traffic (which happens regardless of construction) I think it is a fair price to keep our construction workers safe, keep costs down, reduce project times and be more effective. I await your rebuttal.
"Work Injury Statistics Workers Comp Lawyers."�Workers-Comp-News.com: Work Related Injury Resources for Pennsylvania Personal Injury Claims – Workers Comp Lawyers. 2011. Web. 28 Mar. 2011. .
Fontaine, Tom. "State: Off-hour Road Work 30 Percent Costlier, but Drivers Benefit Read More Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com...; PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW, 21 Aug. 2010. Web. 28 Mar. 2011. .
lovedebate forfeited this round.
Such changes would put our construction workers at risk, increase costs, increase project times and lower effectiveness.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by RougeFox 5 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeits and concedes.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.