Years ago I used to work for a local authority public works department. They had a radio service to communicate with field staff that operated from our central depot.
I don't think there is a need for a standardized R/T standard across all frequencies, and I personally don't care about "sloppy" radio techniques on non-aviation frequencies.
In the example above, and in a few more examples, the users of said frequency are all located in a geographically limited area, are mostly know to each other, there are no non-native English speakers on frequency and most of all, there is far less time-critical information being passed around. (It's not like you're waiting on a landing clearance on short final, while your colleague starts yapping about a sewer pump not working.)
So in those cases, the system still works with far less radio discipline and far less training than what we're used to as pilots. And as long as the system works (for them), who cares?
Heck, there are even differences in procedures between aeronautical and maritime frequencies. Even though their users may be more or less alike (professionals but non-native speakers, and time-sensitive information passed around), the technical characteristics of the maritime frequencies (where most, but not all of the "channels" actually consist of two frequencies, and the shore station copies traffic from the ship->shore onto the shore->ship frequency when the shore station is not speaking) lead to different standards.