DEUT110 A clear distinction must be made between those injuries that are caused by defective equipment or some act of negligence on the part of the employer or are the result of his assets or interests and those in which the employer is blameless. In the former type of case, the worker, like any other injured party, is entitled to the fivefold damages awarded by the halakhah. (These damages embrace loss of income, loss of limb, medical expenses, pain incurred, and the shame resulting from the injury.) Our concern here is solely with the employer's responsibility to share in the social and medical costs incurred in the course of his employment of others but for which he is not directly or indirectly responsible. Our question is to what extent is the worker-employer relationship, extended by the halakhah, as distinct from custom or specific contract, to include such costs. The general halachic principle seems to be that work, just like any other human activity, has its normal element of risk, which has been considered and accepted by the worker upon his acceptance of employment. In other words, the employer does not have any automatic obligations to shoulder the social costs arising out of such risk. This may be seen from the Talmudic discussion concerning a worker who was injured in a tree during the harvesting of dates and olives. The rabbis in that discussion held that the worker, in his desire to earn the wages offered, knowingly took upon himself this risk. [Talmud Bavli, Baba Metzia 112a, as explained by Rashi.] A responsum written in 13th century Spain, rejecting a similar claim for damages, explained that the worker accepted the job despite his knowledge that incidents like this were to be expected in this type of work. [T’shuvot HaRashba 20 (attributed to the Ramban). Also reproduced in the Bet Yosef, Choshen Mishpat, section 188.] Many avenues of employment, however, present elements of risk far in excess of normal, everyday activities. Workers, like all people, are by halachic sources forbidden to place themselves in danger, in accordance with the biblical dictum “And thou shalt surely guard yourselves very much” (Deuteronomy 4:15). Understanding that it is not possible to lead risk free lives, the sages accepted a concept of “normal acceptable risk,” beyond which people were not allowed to place themselves in jeopardy. In our own day [book published 1987-AJL], such industries as coal mining, with its association with black lung disease, or the asbestos or nuclear industries may present an abnormal risk. A labor contract exposing workers to such risk would seem to be contrary to the obligation to guard one's body against harm and therefore not acceptable, even if the workers agreed to it.