No, it doesn’t miss the analogy, it questions the applicability of the analogy by asking that it be tied back more completely to the circumstances at play. Analogies are valuable rhetorical devices only in so far as they map to the salient aspects of the comparative target. In this case, either there is a target group to receive the awards, the those doing the safety work, or there is not. In the later case, the analogy is invalidated unless the resulting conclusion is something like “and so we shouldn’t have an award like this because it would just be a strange thing to do” or something along those lines that equally ties the analogy back to the real world.