wow. just wow. in the words of Archer, "phrasing!!"

there's a way to ask a serious question to get a serious answer, and then there's your way.

Yes, the direct way. I'm sure it's in the budget. Would love to know the figure.

While I can appreciate that, let me rephrase my post:

There's a way of asking a question without being a total dick, and then there's your way.

Being direct doesn't mean being an asshat. I have plenty of experience of doing it the wrong way, and yes, I'm suggesting yours is not the right way.

Edit: "I'm sure it's in the budget."

Actually, I'm guessing this would be covered in the liability insurance. So it's probably a much smaller line item in the budget than you are so dramatically inferring it to be.

It's a useless question anyways, because the company gains nothing by "budgeting" for death, and loses everything by settling on a real number. It's like asking Boeing how many families they expect to send payouts to in any given quarter. The only answer is zero, and any answer above zero is itself negligent.

It's not exactly useless, as it is a serious business concern. However, asking it the way it has been phrased is useless, as you've stated, stating from the start that you are planning on paying out fees like this is just dumb. It is good business planning to be aware of the fact that it is a >0% chance of unintended bad things happening, so let's take out an insurance policy to cover for that contingency. There's a difference between planning for the fact that an accident is possible vs planning to cause an accident.

Exception events like are usually covered by Insurance.

However companies do provision for payouts in potential cases whether private/ class action or government regulatory ones , they are legally required to do so and disclose it in their filings.

Insurance means the maths and plans are worked out by someone.

That is really for the insurance companies covering them.

The actuaries at Insurance Co do that kind of analysis for all products for life/ medical to workplace/ product safety this would probably fall under.

The courts also have fairly well known tables/methods for calculating cost/value of life used to compute compensation for injury/death.

You know back in CS class we had to go over the THERAC25 problem a lot. It wasn't so much about the specifics of the incorrect code, but more about the hubris that it "couldn't have been the code".

It seems like with self driving, it's like 45 companies just started making clones of the THERAC25 where they "are pretty sure it's fixed now, this is easy". It's the same damn ego.