Final answer:
The employee may lack expert judgment, leading to assessments based on personal perception rather than on objective standards. These subjective evaluations might not accurately reflect workplace hazards and can be influenced by various personal factors, resulting in inconsistent and unreliable hazard assessment.
Step-by-step explanation:
A drawback of the subjective standard of hazard assessment on the part of the employee is that the employee may not have expert judgment. Subjective assessments are based on an individual's perception and can be influenced by a variety of factors including lack of knowledge, personal biases, or a tendency to underestimate risks in situations where they perceive no immediate harm to themselves or others, as in the Denial of Injury. Moreover, relying on employees' subjective evaluations can lead to inconsistencies in hazard assessment as seen in the unreliability of self and peer ratings studied by Atkins and Wood.
An individual's evaluation of a potential hazard can be influenced by factors such as the level of stress they experience, the amount of perceived risk, and their personal attitudes towards safety practices. A safety engineer, for example, while objectively reviewing accident reports, would base her conclusions on established safety protocols and data rather than subjective experience.
The subjective standard often falls short of a commonly agreed upon method for assessing hazards which highlights the need for objective and expert evaluations in ensuring workplace safety and minimizing risks.