Scapegoating Fallacy and/or any other fallacy ?

Yesterday at work I put a metal gastro of rice into the freezer as per my manager's request. Later there was a delivery and during this time I was doing other things. I then heard my Manager aggressively shouting, "Can we not put rice in the freezer without a lid!" I initially thought he said "ice" first until later on we both had this conversation:

Jack, when you put rice in the freezer can you put a lid on it because other people are carelessly throwing things in the here causing issues with the rice.

I said 

If other people are carelessly throwing things in the freezer that's nothing to do with me.

He responded:

Look, when it's busy and there's a delivery you know there are going to be people that are going to be a bit reckless more than usual as they need to get things done. So, just Always just assume the worst. And I am not having a go or a dig.

I just said "Ok" then as I couldn't be bothered to argue, and ironically enough I myself was also busy trying to be as quick as I could to help him with an event that I had agreed to do today.

Lastly, would it be a false equivalence on my part to say that "by this logic then we should start wearing stab proof vests in case someone is busy and careless with knifes?"

 

I don't think your boss is scapegoating you here. The key difference here is understanding that fault for causing a problem and responsibility for fixing it are not the same thing. He does acknowledge that your coworkers are being reckless when they're filling the walk in, and that is to blame for the rice getting messed up. But, as they're under pressure to get the delivery put away quickly when they're busy, they can't be relied upon to consistently do so carefully, so he's giving you the responsibility of safeguarding against that. Should they be putting things away more carefully? Maybe, but it seems like that's a more difficult behavior to correct.

Having worked in a few industries, including food service, I can tell you that this isn't unusual. Food safety standards often have redundancy like this built in to account for lapses and miscommunications between employees, so that that way any real food safety issues won't occur unless multiple people are making mistakes.

Do people in kitchens get careless with knives sometimes? Yes. But, in my experience, this usually just causes people to cut their own hands. You'd have to be acting pretty far outside the norms of knife handling to accidentally stab someone in the chest, so I don't think that's really a good comparison.

In the exchange you described, there are several logical elements and potential fallacies to address:

1. **Scapegoating Fallacy**: This fallacy involves blaming a person or group for a problem to deflect attention from the actual causes. In this scenario, your manager is not scapegoating, as he isn't blaming you directly for others' careless actions. Instead, he's suggesting a preventive measure to mitigate potential issues.

2. **False Dilemma**: This could be seen as an implicit fallacy in your manager's reasoning. He suggests that the only way to prevent rice from being damaged is to always put a lid on it, potentially ignoring other solutions like improving others' behavior or organization in the freezer.

3. **False Equivalence**: Your analogy about wearing stab-proof vests as a preventive measure for knife accidents is indeed a false equivalence. Comparing the act of placing a lid on rice to wearing protective gear against potential knife incidents is not a fair comparison, as the severity and improbability of these two scenarios are not similar. The risk management in one everyday situation (covering rice) is not equivalent to a much more severe and less probable scenario (wearing stab-proof vests).

4. **Overgeneralization/Broad Generalization**: The manager's suggestion to "always assume the worst" could be seen as an overgeneralization. It implies a broad application of caution in all situations, which may not always be necessary or efficient.

Overall, while your manager is trying to implement a precautionary measure to prevent potential issues, the reasoning behind "always assume the worst" could be overly broad and not address the root of the problem effectively. It's essential to find a balance in implementing practical preventive measures while also fostering an environment where everyone is responsible for careful and mindful behavior.

The brief argument would be:
-Put a lid over rice because someone might drop something on it.
-By this logic then we should start wearing stab proof vests in case someone is busy and careless with   knives.

That's appeal to extremes .

Also, the argument "If other people are carelessly throwing things in the freezer that's nothing to do with me." is equivalent to saying "We shouldn't take precautionary measures. If other people are careless, that's nothing to do with me". If the rule was that everyone has to be careful, then you would be right to blame the careless co-worker. But if a mistake happens frequently enough and is somewhat unavoidable during rush hour, then protective measures is a reasonable decision. So, one could argue about not applying the rule while the decision is not made yet, but I think if the rule is already in use, then whoever fails to stick with the rule is at fault not for the creation of the disaster but for not averting the disaster.