Proponents of the DGB's proposal argue that a standardized heat-related compensation scheme is a necessary evolution of labor law in the face of a changing climate. As heatwaves become more frequent, the burden of safety should not fall solely on individual employees or small businesses. By creating a formal framework, the government would provide a clear, predictable path for companies to follow, ensuring that worker health is prioritized over short-term production targets.
Advocates emphasize that the physical toll of working in extreme heat is well-documented, leading to increased fatigue, heatstroke, and long-term health complications. A compensation model would remove the financial incentive for workers to push through dangerous conditions, thereby reducing workplace accidents and long-term disability claims. This approach is viewed as a proactive investment in the workforce, preventing the higher costs associated with medical leave and reduced productivity.
Furthermore, supporters suggest that this policy would level the playing field for employers. Currently, companies that voluntarily implement heat safety measures may face a competitive disadvantage compared to those that do not. A national regulation would ensure that all businesses operate under the same safety standards, fostering a more equitable labor market where worker well-being is a universal expectation rather than a variable benefit.