When did workman's comp become worker's comp?

Question

Mike, you will notice these things in the years to come and become just as annoyed. You'll be the new "grampa"!

Answer 1

Wow, Rebel F you are in a wee bit of a grotty mood tonight! (my time).

To me this is not a big deal but I had to answer based on the idea of "inclusive language".  I have one simple point to make: this language evolution does tend to gender neutralise acording to the connotations of the term.  negative terms that stil use the -man and -men endings as left as they are.   Only positive words are gender neutralised.  

As an English teacher, I make to particular attempt to gender neutralise words because I see it as feminist dogma.  Term's such as "manslaughter" remain untouched, for instance....

Answer 2

Workers' compensation laws were enacted to reduce the need for litigation, and to mitigate the requirement that injured workers prove their injuries were their employer's "fault". The first state law was passed in Maryland in 1902, and the first law covering federal employees was passed in 1906. By 1949, all states had enacted some kind of workers' compensation regime.

Answer 3

Who says there was "so much energy" getting it changed? It was a relatively small matter. Seems like ranting about feminism  is where the energy is being wasted in this situation.

To answer your question, states started individually changing the term in the 1970s. Get with the times, grampaw.

Answer 4

Irrelevant

A more exact name would be "Slaves for Rental Comp."

Answer 5

Well, this is really ridiculous because it is obvious. Women have, since the coining of this term become more active in business outside the home. Thus, the terminology has changed. The real question is why does it bother you so? Why does a gender neutral term cause such blood boiling? I don't suppose you'd be happy getting paid workwoman's comp would you? Why should it be gender specific?  Silly.

Everyhing in life changes, because humans change. We evolve. Thus our language evolves.

And I say this with the utmost respect. Dur.

Answer 6

"We all understood that workman stood for both men and women."

No--men WANT women to buy into this, but we're just not doing it.  There is no reason why "men" and "man" should be the default words to describe humans.  No matter how much you tell us that "man" and "men" include women; that doesn't make it so.  It's not that hard to phrase something a little differently so it includes everyone.  For example, "Firefighter" is only one syllable longer than "Fireman", and quite frankly, "Firefighter" sounds way better.  Furthermore, in this instance, changing it to "worker's" has actually SHORTENED the word, therefore it is simpler and better now.  And no one has to feel excluded.  

Pull the stick out of your *** and try and see things from someone else's point of view.

Answer 7

When was there ever such thing as "workman's comp?" I've never heard that one before.

EDIT: In that case, the only one who seems to be getting "worked up" is you. Saying "workman" isn't a very big deal, but unfairness can come in small packages.

Answer 8

Its just better for it to be gender-neutral.

Times have changed, get over it.