Well, duh!

A study by the University of North Carolina has found that workplace policies that allow employees to carry guns are more lethal than those that prohibit weapons, Forbes.com reported April 27.The report, published in the May issue of the American Journal of Public Health, compared workplaces that allow employees to carry weapons and those that don't. It found that murders are three times more likely to occur in workplaces where employees may carry
weapons, and the risk doubles when the weapon is a gun.

.

Worker's Memorial Day, Arkansas
Angelica workers to join Workers Memorial Day events across California
Governor Schwarzenegger Proclaims April 28, 2005 Workers' Memorial Day, California
Local citizens recognize fallen workers, California (added)
Workers killed on job remembered, Illinois (added)
Worker Memorial Day observed, Iowa
State honors those who died on the job, Iowa (added)
Report: Maine Tops Nation In Workplace Injuries, Maine
AFL-CIO chapter remembers fallen workers with ceremony, Maryland (added)
Those who died doing their jobs are remembered, Massachusetts
Little pain for killing workers, unions say, Massachusetts
UAW members gather for workers' memorial, Michigan
MSU report shows number of on-the-job deaths remains unchanged, Michigan
Workers Who Lost Their Lives Remembered, Michigan (added)
MnDOT remembers transportation workers killed on job, Minnesota
Activists Rally for Safer Working Conditions, Mississippi
Voice of the reader: Safe workplaces need to become reality, Montana
Fallen Laborers Remembered, New York
PEF, LABOR ORGANIZATIONS AND THE PUBLIC OBSERVE WORKERS' MEMORIAL Day, New York
DOT honors highway workers killed in construction accidents, New York
Press lawmakers to make sure labor is not a cause of death, New York
Remembering Workers Killed on the Job, North Carolina
Early honor for workers killed on job draws 150 in Toledo, Ohio
Massillon remembers its steel history, Ohio (added)
Guest Viewpoint: Honor all who die on the job, here or abroad, Oregon (Steve Hecker)
Labor Forum Features Top Safety Experts, Oregon
Seven lost lives lengthen sad tally, Pennsylvania
WHEN YOUR JOB KILLS YOU, WHO REMEMBERS?, Pennsylvania (added)
Eleven SD Workers Killed on the Job Honored Today, South Dakota (added)
Workers Memorial Day, Tennessee
Texas had most fatalities of Hispanic workers in '03, Texas
Union holds Workers Memorial Day service, Texas (added)
Death at work: A memorial, Washington
Fallen not forgotten: Day honors those killed on the job, Wisconsin (added)
Workers killed on job to be honored, Wisconsin
Wyo tops nation in work fatalities, Wyoming
Worker Memorial Day Honors Those Who Have Died on the Job


Other Countries

Worker safety drive launched, Australia
Workplace deaths a wake-up call: widow, Australia
A special tribute to people who have died or been injured in the workplace, Canada
Flags half-mast for fallen workers, Canada
Politics intrude on memorial services, Canada
Workers killed on job mourned, Canada
Amicus Urges Speedy Introduction of Corporate Killing Legislation ..., Germany
Britain remembers workplace deaths
TUC commemorates International Workers Memorial Day, Ghana
Unions mark Workers Memorial Day with calls for accountability, Great Britain
Memorial day for workplace dead, Great Britain
Best memorial for workers would be tough new laws on corporate killing, Great Britain
Plaque erected to honour local workforce, Hong Kong
Malta joins the world to mark Safety and Health at Work Day, Malta
Workplace deaths remembered in rally, New Zealand
Planting hope for workers' welfare, New Zealand
Basque trade unions organise acts separately on the World Day forSafety and Health at Work Spain
WTO protest over health and safety, Switzerland
With job related deaths topping 2 million annually, UN calls for preventive steps, United Nations

More on worldwide events at Hazards Magazine.

.

Labels: AFL-CIO

Worker Memorial Day, although given birth by the labor movement of this and other countries, has become such an institution that even the most virulently anti-labor administration in this nation's history recognizes it each year -- at least in press releases.

But no Worker Memorial Day would be complete without the traditional Confined Space commentary on OSHA's ever shrinking observance of this day.

Shrinking? Since WMD '03, OSHA's tradional press release has been getting smaller and small, dropping every year to just over half of the previous year's size.

This year's WMD press release was a paltry 226 words, packed into 5 short paragraphs (compared to 415 words last year and a whopping 749 words the year before).

This is my favorite paragraph from this year's release:

"The dedicated men and women of the U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration pause to reflect on their mission and its meaning for the well-being of our Nation. Those who enforce workplace standards, together with those engaged in outreach and compliance assistance, and all of OSHA's myriad tasks, today renew their efforts to ensure that all American workers return safely each day to their homes and loved ones.

Yes, they are dedicated. I used to work with them. It's true. But for some reason, this year, the only ones that are apparently truly dedicated are those who "enforce workplace standards, together with those engaged in outreach and compliance assistance."

What about those who develop new standards? That used to be a big part of OSHA's job. Now it's not even mentioned (OK, maybe it's part of those other "myriad tasks.")

Am I being petty and vindictive? Maybe. But it's my blog. If you don't like it, go write your own.

.

As we remember workers who have died on the job, we need to think about more than their "bad luck." The International Labor Office, in its report "A Fair Globalization." emphasizes the interconnectedness of economic insecurity and poor working conditions around the globe, and argues that a minimum level of socio-economic security is essential to cope with the strains of globalization. Economically vulnerable workers have little power to advocate for improved working conditions and job safety.

Lest we think that this is a problem only in faraway countries, one need only read the weekly toll of fatal workplace accidents in the U.S. to see that immigrant workers, an especially vulnerable segment of the workforce, are disproportionately represented. Beyond these tragic workplace deaths lies a vast global toll of ill health connected with various forms of economic and job insecurity, not to mention workplace exposures to hazardous substances.

From an Op-Ed by Steve Hecker, associate professor at the University of Oregon's Labor Education and Research Center

Using health and safety issues in an bargaining campaign? There's an idea.

Workers at Angelica Textile Services are bringing health and safety issues to the front of their stuggle to force the company to bargain in good faith. The workers, represented by UNITE, held Workers Memorial Day rallies in Oakland, Los Angeles and Fresno, California:

Laundry workers at Angelica toil in filthy, unsanitary conditions where repetitive strain injuries are common, amputations occur, and linen quality is questionable. Workers face dangerous working conditions, including handling material which may carry HIV. Although workers are exposed to Hepatitis B, Angelica doesn’t always provide vaccinations. The multi-million dollar company, based in Chesterfield, Missouri, faces over $435,000 in possible fines from federal and state health and safety agencies.

Angelica is the leading health care linen service provider in the United States. The company has been cited in 17 different OSHA investigations and faces proposed penalties of nearly half a million dollars for not providing the safety training or protective equipment, even though they're exposed to linens soaked with blood and feces, that frequently contain used hypodermic needles and surgical instruments. Despite their exposure to materials that could transmit hepatitis B, the Angelica workers are not provided hepatitis B vaccinations.

A contract covering several Northern California shops expires on April 30th and Angelica workers throughout the the nation have threatened to strike on May 5if the company continues to break labor laws, jeopardize their health and safety and bargain in bad faith.

.

This is from an article from Dr. Michael Lax, Medical Director of the Central NY Occupational Health Clinical Center about the injured workers he sees who have gotten injured or become ill on the job:

One of the most striking things I have noted is how badly workers are treated from the time they are first injured or sick. Time after time, I see workers who have been injured treated like worn-out pieces of machinery, tossed onto the junk heap without a thought as to what they have contributed to the workplace or what they are still capable of contributing.

When they try and access workers' compensation benefits, they are fought every step of the way by the insurance carrier, delaying needed medical care and needlessly prolonging the injury or illness. They find that many physicians refuse to take workers' compensation or see patients with work-related maladies. Finally, when they look for other work, they face the discrimination of employers who don't want to hire someone with limitations, especially if those limitations are the result of a work-related health problem.

And throughout this often long process, the injured worker is forced to confront the accusation, sometimes subtly stated, sometimes blatantly expressed, that s/he is a faker, just trying to milk the system for some easy money.

As might be imagined, the injured worker who finds him or herself facing this situation is often devastated. It is no wonder that serious depression, anger, anxiety and frustration so often amplify the distress of the injury or illness and the difficulties of accessing medical care and benefits.

***

Fixing the system so that injured workers are treated with the dignity and support they deserve, and so that workplace injuries and illnesses are prevented, will require changing this basic problem. We should support an agenda for specific changes in workers' compensation, more vigorous preventive efforts and universal health coverage. But more fundamentally, worship of the bottom line needs to be replaced with the simple justice of requiring employers to take full financial responsibility for workers injured in their workplaces. If employers paid what they owe, efforts to prevent workplace injuries and illnesses would increase dramatically and the toll of these calamities on workers' lives would be diminished. This would be something to celebrate on future Workers Memorial Days.

On March 23, 2005, a huge explosion ripped through the giant BP Amoco refinery in Texas City, Texas, killing 15 contract workers. Twelve of the workers were in an office trailer located in the middle of the blast zone. As with most workplace fatalities, illnesses and injuries, these deaths were preventable. While a full investigation won’t be completed for many months, it is clear that refinery officials were aware that the process was outdated and hazardous. Refinery officials and the contractor were also aware of the trailer’s hazardous location.

Today, April 28, is Workers Memorial Day. Across the country, workers and labor unions will pause to remember the 15 Texas City employees and the more than 5,500 other workers killed in workplace incidents over the past year. Between 50 and 60 thousand workers perished from work-related illnesses caused by toxic materials like asbestos close to five million suffered injuries and illnesses. The toll is enormous: according to Liberty Mutual, the nation’s largest workers’ compensation insurance company, the direct cost of occupational injury and illness is $1 billion per week, with indirect costs many times higher.

Congress passed the Occupational Safety and Health Act 35 years ago to assure “every working man and woman in the nation safe and healthful working conditions.” Among the tools given to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) were the authorization “to set mandatory occupational safety and health standards” and the ability to penalize those who break the laws. But instead of making progress in workplace safety over the past several years, the Bush administration has taken the country backwards.

In the workplace safety field, the Bush administration’s aim to make workplace safety issues less “confrontational” is transforming this country from a nation of laws to a nation of fact sheets and web pages.

One of the first actions of the Bush administration was to repeal an OSHA standard that addressed the biggest source of injury facing American workers -- ergonomic hazards. Year after year back, shoulder and wrist disorders make up one-third of all workplace injuries and illnesses. Instead of a standard that would have forced employers to address this workplace epidemic, OSHA substituted voluntary guidelines, along with a new innovation of the Bush administration: the Alliance – a voluntary information sharing partnership between industry associations and OSHA.

Setting up voluntary alliances as a replacement for mandatory standards has become a pattern for the agency and a means to accomplish the long-term goal of President Bush’s corporate supporters – making OSHA irrelevant.

For example, when the US Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, an independent government agency, recommended in 2002 that OSHA revise a standard to prevent explosions that have killed over 100 workers between 1980 and 2001, OSHA’s only response was a voluntary alliance with the chemical industry.

When a butter flavoring chemical destroyed the lungs of thirty workers at one popcorn plant in Missouri, OSHA formed an alliance with the Popcorn Council instead issuing an emergency standard. The alliance has yet to produce even a fact sheet. This is not an isolated example. OSHA regulates only around 600 out of the thousands of chemicals used in industry, and the vast majority of those standards are based on information more than 40 years old. The only chemical standard close to completion, however, is being done under a court order.

There is nothing wrong with promoting outreach and information sharing. In fact, government agencies should do more of it. But outreach should accompany enforcement, not replace it. Educating drivers about the dangers of drunk driving is important. But education should not replace strict laws that punish drivers found guilty of drunk driving.

OSHA’s penalty structure is another problem. Even when an employer knowingly puts a worker into a dangerous environment that causes his death, the maximum penalty, which OSHA rarely pursues, is 6 months in jail. The penalty for harassing a burro on federal land is one year in jail. In fact, killing fish and crabs draw larger penalties than killing workers. After a chemical tank at a Delaware Motiva refinery exploded in 2001, dissolving a worker in sulfuric acid, OSHA issued a $170,000 fine. But because the acid was released into the atmosphere and the nearby river where it killed thousands of fish and crabs, the Environmental Protection Agency levied a $10 million fine on the company.

Earlier this week, a Brooklyn contractor pleaded guilty to the death of a worker and to cheating workers out of the wages the contractor was supposed to be paying its employees. For killing one worker and injuring others, the employer potentially faces six months in jail, OSHA's maximum penalty. But for committing mail fraud while underpaying its workers (the building was under contract with the Postal Service), the employer faces a possible 20 year jail term.

The purpose of Workers Memorial Day is to “mourn for the dead and fight for the living.” Worthy goals indeed. But forgotten in this motto are the millions injured on the job every year, many of whom are (were) dedicated workers that have been tossed into the garbage by their employers and our country’s disintegrating workers compensation system. Like the families of those killed in the workplace, most of those injured are left to their own devices without anyone to put their plight into a political context, without anyone out there organizing them for change. Confined Space has fallen into the same trap – focusing on the dead (who are easier to find and count than the injured and ill, and who make far sexier stories) – and forgetting about the millions who have lost their livelihoods, lost the useful lives they once lived, and too often have lost their homes and means of support.

The political issues raging in this country – over court appointments, social security, terrorism and the war in Iraq – are important, but they tend to overshadow many of the concerns of the vast majority of people who are not politically engaged. But ask people if they think that workers injured on the job should suffer economically for the rest of their lives, ask people whether the jobs and chemicals should be considered safe until we manage to count the bodies or lungs of people who prove otherwise, ask people whether they think they have the power to make their workplaces safer or whether they think there is a role for laws and government enforcement – and you’ll probably get answers that don’t line up with those who are in power in Washington (or in most state capitals) today. The challenge is to organize them into a potent political force – not just in New York city and Boston, but in Wichita, Kansas, Houston Texas, Boise, Idaho and Atlanta, Georgia.

This is the challenge we face if we are ever again to move forward on workplace safety issues – in Republican or Democratic administrations. And we’re not going to be able to depend excusively on labor unions to get there. They’re too small, they’re too consumed with fighting for survival, and health and safety has not (yet) risen to the level where enough labor leaders see it as one way to build the labor movement. This doesn’t mean that we give up on labor; they’re still the most potent progressive force out there, but it does mean that we can’t depend on them exclusively. Some states have COSH groups, some have injured workers associations and some states have strong, active and aware unions. But they aren’t enough. Unless and until those concerned about workplace safety make strong common cause with other progressive groups – environmentalists, womens rights groups, progressive churches, immigrant organizations and others, ours will be a difficult and ultimately futile struggle.

The American people are ready to listen. A recent poll showed that out of a variety of issues that Americans think Congress should be involved in (endangered species, gun control, gay marriage, steroids in baseball, "Schiavo" type family health cases), "Rules in the workplace that deal with health and safety issues" came out on top.

And I believe you'd get similar answers if you asked a few more questions:

• Do you think that the health effects of chemicals should be understood and the chemicals regulated before or after workers get sick and die from being exposed on the job?
  
  
• Do you think that 6 months in jail is an appropriate punishment for an employer who knowingly violates the law, putting a worker into a job where he is killed?
  
  
• Do you think that OSHA standards that protect employees from exposure to dangerous chemicals should be based on the most recent scientific information, or information that was gathered forty years ago?
  
  
• Do you think that public employees who fix your roads, work in your sewage treatment plants, care for the mentally ill, put out our fires and guard our most dangerous criminals should have the same guarantee of a safe workplace that private sector employees doing the same work have?

I could go on and on, but you get the idea.

Finally, with more than 50,000 workers dying each year from work-related accidents and illnesses, with millions suffering injuries, with workers in the U.S. now working more hours than workers in most of Western Europe and Japan more than one quarter of workers in the mining, manufacturing and wholesale trade industries working more than 40 hours per week, and with mounting evidence that these conditions cause elevated levels of psychological stress, increased exposure to physical hazards and more repetitive stress problems, as well as other serious health problems like heart attacks -- with all of these problems increasing in American workplaces, with the labor movement spiraling into oblivion, why are we, on this Workers Memorial Day, worrying about whether the AFL-CIO is going to abolish its health and safety department? Why can't we seem to understand that the conditions people work under are among the strongest issues on which to build a labor movement that actually shows that it cares about what people actually do at work -- between 9:00 and 5:00 or between 5:00 and 1:00, or between 1:00 and 9:00.

These are the thoughts I'm having this Workers Memorial Day -- and they aren't happy ones.

.

Labels: AFL-CIO

The AFL-CIO has released its 14th annual Death on the Job report (Introduction here. Full 154 page report here.) The report is a national and state-by-state profile of worker safety and health in the United States. This version takes a look at not just the past year, but the entire first term of the Bush administration. It contains every bit of data you’ll ever need to back up your health and safety arguments or conduct a media interview. Read it, download it, print it out and save it.

Here are some of the "highlights."

• According to the BLS, there were 5,559 workplace deaths due to traumatic injuries in 2003, a slight increase from the number of deaths in 2002, when 5,534 workplace deaths were reported.
  
  
• The construction sector had the largest number of fatal work injuries (1,126) in 2003, followed by transportation and warehousing (805) and agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting (707).
  
  
• The number of workplace homicides increased for the first time since 2000.
  
  
• In 2003, 4.4 million injuries and illnesses were reported in private-sector workplaces, a slight decrease from 4.7 million in 2002, as well as 585,300 injuries and illnesses among state and local employees in the 30 states and territories where these data are collected.
  
  
• Injuries and Illnesses are Underestimated: While government statistics show that occupational injury and illness are on the decline, numerous studies have shown that government counts of occupational injury and illness are underestimated by as much as 69 percent.
  
  
• Musculoskeletal disorders continue to account for one-third of all injuries and illnesses with days away from work The occupations that reported the highest number of MSDs involving days away from work in 2003 were nursing aides, orderlies and attendants. MSDs are underreported by the BLS by at least a factor of two.
  
  
• Immigrant Workers: Fatal injuries to Hispanic or Latino workers decreased for the second year in a row, although Hispanic workers continue to record the highest rate of fatal injuries among the racial/ethnic groups reported.
  
  Thirty percent of the fatal injuries to foreign-born workers were a result of transportation incidents and assaults and homicides accounted for nearly thirty percent. The construction industry accounted for 260 or one-third of all Hispanic worker fatalities.

Enforcement

• In FY 2005, there are at most 2,138 federal and state OSHA inspectors responsible for enforcing the law at approximately 8 million workplaces.
  
  
• In FY 2004, OSHA conducted 638 fewer health and safety inspections than in FY 2003. At its current staffing and inspection levels, it would take federal OSHA 108 years to inspect each workplace under its jurisdiction just once.
  
  
• In fiscal year (FY) 2004, serious violations of the OSH Act carried an average penalty of only $873.
  
  
• The average number of hours spent per inspection decreased between FY 1999 and FY 2004, from 22 to 18.7 hours per safety inspection and from 40 to 35.6 hours per health inspection.
  
  
• The number of citations for willful violations decreased from 607 in FY 1999 to 446 in FY 2004.
  
  
• Criminal Prosecutions: Of the 170,000 workplace deaths since 1982, only 16 convictions involving jail time have resulted—although 1,242 cases involving work deaths were determined by OSHA to involve “willful” violations by employers (violations in which the employer knew that workers’ lives were being put at risk).
  
  
• Coverage: The current OSHA law still does not cover 8.5 million state and local government employees. Although these public employees encounter the same hazards as private-sector workers, in 26 states and the District of Columbia they are not provided with protection under the OSH Act.

Budget

Overall funding levels proposed for OSHA, MSHA and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) are insufficient to maintain current program activities of these agencies.

• At OSHA, the President proposes to eliminate all funding for worker safety training programs at the same time seeking increases for employer assistance programs. Taking into account inflation, this year’s proposed budget freezes OSHA’s and MSHA’s enforcement programs.
  
  
  
• For FY 2006, the Bush administration has proposed a $286 million budget for NIOSH, similar to the level of funds appropriated for NIOSH in FY 2005 ($285.4 million), but adjusted for inflation represents a $5.1 million cut in real dollar terms.
  
  
• The administration’s FY 2006 MSHA budget proposes $280 million in funding for MSHA compared with $279.2 appropriated in FY 2005. Adjusting for inflation, the FY 2006 proposed MSHA budget represents a $4.9 million cut in real dollar terms

OSHA and MSHA Standards

The Bush administration is the only administration in history not to issue a major safety and health regulation during its four years in office.

• During its first term, in addition to repealing the ergonomics standard, the administration has withdrawn 24 pending OSHA regulatory actions from its regulatory agenda, leaving few major initiatives on the regulatory schedule.
  
  
• OSHA still has taken no action on the Employer Payment for Personal Protective Equipment standard, which has been through the rulemaking process and is ready for final action.
  
  
• The one major regulation on which OSHA is working, hexavalent chromium, is the result of a lawsuit brought against the agency by Public Citizen and PACE International Union.
  
  
• There are currently 4 economically significant regulations still on the regulatory agenda in addition to Hexavalent Chromium: Crystalline Silica (in the pre-rule stage); Confined Spaces in Construction (proposed rule stage); Beryllium (pre-rule stage) and Hearing Conservation for Construction Workers (long-term action with the next action undetermined). There is no commitment from OSHA to propose the rules that are in the pre-rule or long-term action stages.
  
  
• Seventeen MSHA standards for miners have been withdrawn since the President Bush took office, including the Air Quality, Chemical Substances and Respiratory standard.

Challenges

So what are the issues that we need to work on, according to the report?

• Hispanic and Foreign-Born Worker Fatalities and Injuries: Fatalities among Hispanic workers rose 48 percent from 1992 to 2003, while overall workplace fatalities went down by 11 percent.
  
  Hispanic men have the greatest overall relative risk of fatal occupational injury of any gender or race/ethnicity group. In 2000, Hispanic construction workers made up less than 16 percent of the construction workforce, but they suffered 23.5 percent of the fatalities. In 2000, Hispanic construction workers were nearly twice as likely to be killed by occupational injuries than their non-Hispanic counterparts.
  
  In February 2002, OSHA announced an initiative to address the increased safety and health risks of immigrant and Hispanic workers. But at the same time, the administration has proposed terminating funding for worker training and outreach programs, many of which are targeted to these high-risk workers.
  
  
• Ergonomics: Despite repealing the OSHA ergonomics standard four years ago, the administration’s major activities consist of just three final ergonomics guidelines—for the nursing home industry, retail grocery stores and poultry processing and a total of 17 general duty clause citations since January 2001.
  
  
• Congressman Charlie Norwood has introduced four pieces of legislation, "a grab bag of political favors for business -- that threaten worker safety." More here (pdf).
  
  
• OSHA has not aggressively addressed work-related issues stemming from 9/11 like biohazards, emergency response, security and surveillance of workers cleaning up the World Trade Center.
  
  
• Long hours of work and the way work is organized: The International Labor Organization (ILO) reports that hours worked annually in the United States have been steadily increasing over the past couple of decades. Workers in the U.S. now work more hours than workers in most of Western Europe and Japan. Evidence that long hours of work cause injuries and illnesses is growing.
  
  
• Workers’ health is also affected by such elements as the pace of work, number of people performing the job (staffing levels), hours and days on the job, amount and length of rest breaks, work load, layout of the work and skills of those workers on the job. Work organization changes, such as machine-paced work, inadequate work-rest cycles, time pressures, and repetitive work are associated with musculoskeletal disorders, increases in blood pressure and risks of cardiovascular mortality.
  
  Ten states have passed legislation placing limits on the amount of mandatory overtime nurses or health care workers can be forced to work and some states are passing legislation establishing nurse-to-patient hospital staffing ratios
  
  
• Behavior-based safety programs, incentive programs and injury discipline programs attempt to shift the responsibility for injuries and job safety to workers instead of focusing on workplace hazards and discourage workers from reporting injuries or unsafe working conditions.

Workers Compensation

• Because workers’ compensation insurers are denying claims and workers are failing to file them in the first place, workers, their families, businesses, federal and state governments together are paying anywhere from $7.6 billion to $23.1 billion each year for occupational diseases that should be covered by workers compensation insurance.

• Led by the American Insurance Association, and the Chamber of Commerce, businesses from Hawaii to Alaska to New Hampshire and Maryland continued to demand cuts in workers’ compensation coverage and benefits in 2004-2005. For the most part, they succeeded.
  
  
• Insurance companies were largely successful convincing state legislatures in 2004 and 2005 to enact more restrictions on medical care and disability benefits, limit attorneys and resist attempts to regulate rates
  
  
• Workers’ compensation laws need to be reformed to expand coverage and eligibility, to increase benefit levels and to permit workers their choice of physician. Insurance reform is sorely needed.

What is to be done?

According to the AFL-CIO,

The OSH Act needs to be strengthened to make it easier to issue safety and health standards and to make the penalties for violating the law tougher. Workers need to be given a real voice in the workplace and real rights to participate in safety and health as part of a comprehensive safety program to identify and correct hazards. Coverage should be extended to the millions of workers who fall outside the Act’s protection.

A standard is still needed to protect workers from ergonomic hazards and crippling repetitive strain injuries and back injuries, which continue to represent the most significant job safety problem in the nation. OSHA needs to keep up with new hazards that face workers as workplaces and the nature of work change. Hazardous conditions in the service sector and in retail trade need greater attention. OSHA and MSHA need additional funding to develop and enforce standards and to expand worker safety and health training. Similarly, additional funds are needed for NIOSH to support enhanced research on safety and health problems.

.

Labels: AFL-CIO, Charlie Norwood

The Senate Judiciary Committe held a hearing yesterday on the asbestos compensation bill, S. 852, co-sponsored by Senator's Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Pat Leahy (D-VT).

AFL-CIO Safety and Health Director Peg Seminario summed up the labor federation's main issues.

Over the past three years, as we have worked on this legislation, we have listened to the concerns and proposals put forward by business and insurers, and have attempted to be responsive. In the interest of reaching agreement on legislation we have compromised on our initial position that all claimants deserve a monetary award. We have accepted a much lower level of overall funding for the program than we think will be actually required to meet anticipated claims. And, while we have pushed for full transparency on the funding mechanisms and participant contributions, we have not made such disclosures a condition of our endorsement.

But on the fundamental issue of ensuring that the legislation will create a system that will, in fact, deal with victims fairly and pay timely compensation to those who are sick from asbestos disease, we can accept no compromise that does not achieve this basic objective. It is not in victims’ interests to trade one flawed system for another that has serious identifiable problems and deficiencies and threatens to leave many individuals worse off. These serious problems include the exclusion of thousands of asbestos-related lung cancer claims, leaving most victims with no remedy during the start-up period, the inclusion of restrictions preventing individuals with both asbestos and silica disease from obtaining access to the courts or fair compensation from the fund, unworkable statute of limitations provisions that could bar tens of thousands of worthy claims, and program sunset provisions that could leave claimants in limbo should the fund run out of money.

The main issue is 25,000 - 30,000 people would be left out of the fund. This group was extensively exposed to asbestos, have lung cancer with no obvious signs of underlying asbestos disease, but who also smoked.

The AFL-CIO is also supporting the ability of terminally ill and seriously disabled victims to continue to use the courts until the fund is functioning.

The insurance industry is opposing the bill because of "leakage" -- the ability of terminally ill and other disabled asbestos victims to continue to use courts until the fund becomes operational and after it runs out of money.

Despite the strong opposition of the AFL-CIO, the United Auto Workers continue to support the bill. Although the UAW recognizes some of the bill's flaws, UAW Legislative Director Alan Reuther explained that "The UAW firmly believes that the no-fault asbestos compensation system established under the Specter-Leahy bill would be vastly preferable to the current tort system."

In addition,

As a result of the mass of law suits filed against companies that produced or used products containing asbestos, a number of auto parts companies have been forced into bankruptcy. In addition, rising claims against major auto manufacturers threaten to expose them to significant liabilities in the future, posing a major threat to their long-term economic health and the jobs and benefits of hundreds of thousands of active and retired UAW members.

***

The system established under the Specter-Leahy bill would ensure that the costs of compensating victims of asbestos-related diseases are spread broadly across defendant companies and insurers in a rational, predictable manner. This will help to reduce business bankruptcies, thereby protecting the jobs and benefits of hundreds of thousands of workers and retirees.

The committee is expected to vote on the bill tomorrow. If it passes, it will be sent to the Senate floor. No bill has been introduced in the House of Representatives yet, and it is not clear whether they would pass the same bill.

Meanwhile, the The Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO) met with Senator Specter yesterda in Washington to demonstrate their opposition to the bill. ADAO Co-Founder and Executive Director Linda Reinstein outlined their opposition to the bill: the elimination of a person's basic right to have their grievances heard in court, vast under-funding, unwarranted ineligibility and exclusion of claims, faulty medical criteria, burdensome claims processes, insufficient up front funding, lack of equitable transition for current cases, under funding for research into potential treatments and a cure, lack of proper definition for financial awards and too much power in the hands of the Administrator.

According to Reinstein,

"The bottom line is that Senate Bill 852 was written without the voice of the victims. At the same time, it protects the asbestos industry and cuts its liability at every turn...I believe the victims' organizations gathered here today - and the thousands of victims we represent across the country - would support an asbestos resolution bill -- if it was fair and equitable. There are solutions to this problem. But, they are not represented in this bill. Ladies and gentleman, asbestos companies are not victims. Congress should only pass legislation that properly protects and supports those who are."

Labels: Asbestos

One of the most interesting -- and often upsetting -- parts about representing health care and social service workers was listening to stories about their working conditions -- conditions that few people are aware of and that fewer people would ever want to do, especially for the low wages.

This is what workers endure at the Latham Centers in Brewster, MA which specializes in children and adults with emotional and behavioral problems.

• A resident threw a flower pot at a counselor. The counselor who was injured during the flower pot attack could not seek medical help because she was the only employee present
  
  
• A week after the flower pot attack, after the union's request for additional staffing was denied, the same client bit the counselor eight times on the arms. The counselor now has nerve damage in one arm and will soon undergo surgery.
  
  
• Last October, a counselor suffered three broken ribs after trying to restrain a violent resident. There were two counselors on duty at the time watching three residents.
  
  
• A few months later, a resident tried to choke a staffer who was driving an agency van. In January, a resident threw feces and blood at a counselor.
  
  
• Last weekend, a resident assaulted a counselor as he tried to restrain her. The counselor, who was working alone, had to ask another client to call a different residence for help. But the residence did not have enough staff, so the counselor asked the client to dial 911. When the Yarmouthport police arrived, the resident attacked an officer and was later charged with assault and battery.

The union representing the workers has been negotiating with management for their first contract since November 2003.

The union, of course, is making outrageous demands. They want two staff members working together on all shifts and annual cost-of-living increases. The workers currently make $12 anhour, which comes to a princely $24,000 a year. Approximately 40 percent of staff at the centers has turned over in the last 18 months.

Executive director Anne McManus says the workers are a bunch of lying greedheads:

McManus questioned whether the six incidents of assault actually occurred and said Latham Centers adheres by state regulations.

McManus said that the centers do not lack adequate staff and that the unions are focusing on the assaults because of the contentious contract negotiations. "This is just a response to the union's anxiety over getting a contract signed very quickly," she said.

This brings a number of questions to my mind:

Are people like McManus born that way, or do they have to go to school to become mean and malicious? Are they truly ignorant or just cruel?

And finally, how can anyone read an article like this or talk to these workers and still believe that unions have outlived their usefulness?

.

Labels: Behavioral Safety

Nathan Newman has ranted and raved quite articulately about the extensive new paperwork requirements that the Bush administration has imposed on labor unions in retaliation for their support of Democratic candidates. Not only that the sheer detail is clearly punitive, but that labor corruption uncovered recently by federal prosecutors, while shameful, is insignificant in comparison to the huge scale of recent corporate scandals.

Can you imagine what would be said if liberals were demanding similar disclosure from every corporation? Actually, we already know since they are already whining about the Sarbanes-Oxley bill passed in the wake of the Enron-WorldCom scandals, and the disclosure to the public required for those forms are far less extensive.

Even as the Bush administration fails to fund inspectors to enforce the minimum wage or workplace safety, it's diverting money to audit unions-- clear political revenge against its perceived enemies. It has no evidence of any pervasive problems in union finances, but it's manufacturing a supposed crisis to justify its political attack.

Dan Haar at the Hartford Currant makes a similar point:

[Secretary of Labor, Elaine] Chao, like others in the Bush administration, has an annoying habit of couching anti-worker rules as pro-worker measures. This confusing and unwarranted mess of data is, the department insists, a way of letting union members know where their money is going.

Don't believe it, coming from an administration that has replaced rules with voluntary compliance for businesses, adopted few, if any workplace safety rules and slashed budgets for such items as worker safety training.

As one union leader put it, aptly, "If for-profit corporations had to have the same level of disclosure, there would be a general meltdown on Wall Street."

So what exactly does Wall St. think about all of this? Well, if one is to believe that the Wall St. Journal (subcription required) speaks for Wall St., all these rules have very little to do with uncovering corruption and everything to do with undermining unions:

Talk about eye-openers. Consider a LM-2 filed by a California local of the Communication Workers of America. While the union's spending is fairly routine, its dues base certainly isn't; 47% of its members are "agency fee payers." In plain English, these are members who, exercising their right under the Supreme Court's 1988 Beck decision, have withheld any dues that go to political or non-bargaining-related activity.

This suggests either that the members disagree with their leaders' agenda, or resent their forced enrollment in the union in the first place. It is especially notable because a vote of only 50% of a union's participants can oust the current leadership, or more drastically decertify the union altogether. Evidence of such disgruntlement in the ranks is exactly the sort of information that union chiefs would prefer to keep quiet.

Well, at least they're being honest.

.

Some excerpts from a Workers Memorial Day column by Canadian Autoworkers President Buzz Hargrove:

New chemicals are introduced into workplaces every day without adequate testing to prove they will not cause harm to workers. For centuries, workers have been the guinea pigs of health hazards. Toxic substances, which are concentrated in workplaces, find their way in greatly reduced concentrations to the environment where they may harm others.

We now know there are 25 carcinogens (cancer-causing agents) that cause lung cancer, the most common cancer among men and women in Canada. Twenty four of these carcinogens were discovered by counting excess deaths among workers. The only exception is cigarette smoke, but it too causes deaths among workers who are exposed at work.

What is to be done? Among Hargrove's suggestions:

• We can forbid use in the workplace of substances we know are harmful. We've begun to do that with cigarette smoke and we can do it for so many other substances. The Canadian Auto Workers has bargained a prohibition on the use of a number of carcinogens in our collective agreements with General Motors, Ford and DaimlerChrysler. These prohibitions should be written into law.
  
  
• We can use the precautionary principle for new hazards. This principle states: When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause-and-effect relationships are not fully established scientifically. It is wrong to wait for a body count of workers before we take action.
  
  
• We can use the ALARA principle (as low as reasonably achievable) to reduce workers' exposure to harmful substances.
  
  
• We can support workers who have the courage to stand up to employers by refusing to work with substances they know will harm their health and by insisting on the control of these substances or their replacement by safer substitutes.

.

Clifton Patterson of Benton, Mississippi was fatally shot at work last week in by a co-worker during a dispute over missing mechanic's tools.

Following the shooting, an article entitled "Workplace shootings in Mississippi" appeared in the Jackson Clarion Ledger. The article describes the killings of a dozen workers over the past 19 years. That's not bad, I thought. Only 12 workers shot in almost 20 years? But reading closer, I realized that these were all workers killed by co-workers who had "gone postal." But what about all of the workers shot to death in convenience store robberies? Don't they count as "workplace shootings?" What about law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty, like Thomas Catchings, a 41-year-old Jackson motorcycle patrol officer who was killed last week in a gun battle. Wasn't he a worker?

Actually, so-called "worker-on-worker" or "internecine" violence amounts to no more than about 7% of all workplace violence, even though it receives most of the press. In fact, violence, mostly from retail robberies, is the leading cause of death among immigrant workers. But all of those workers who get shot in convenience or police officers who chose dangerous work somehow aren't as sexy as workers who "go postal."

Related Stories

Immigrants & Teens: Frontline Soldiers in the War Against Retail Crime?, July 28, 2004
Workplace Violence: Fashionable vs. Unfashionable, January 18, 2004

.

Labels: Workplace Violence

On April 23, 2004, an explosion ripped through Formosa Plastics Corp, killing 5 workers. OSHA has fined the company $300,000 and a report from the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board is expected this Fall.

ILLIOPOLIS - On the face of it, Bradford Bradshaw would be about the last person you'd expect to be rooting for a new chemical plant in Illiopolis.

On Saturday night, he attended an emotional candlelight service honoring the memory of his five co-workers who died after the Formosa Plastics Corp. plant was hit by a fiery explosion a year ago at 10:40 p.m. April 23.

Bradshaw escaped having his name added to the list of the dead by the merest fraction: burned over 60 percent of his body with his right eye destroyed, he went into kidney and congestive heart failure and was in a coma for 6½ weeks. His wife, Donna, said afterward that his face looked "like a marshmallow after you leave it in the fire too long."

And yet, reflecting back on the 12 months that now separate him from the disaster, Bradshaw, 48, thinks the greater good would be served by having those dozens of well-paying jobs back. He recalls co-workers, many related to each other and who had worked out there all of their lives, and says chemical plant paychecks sustained a lot of families.

"If it's rebuilt and run correctly and safely, then I don't have a problem with it, and I think a lot of people wouldn't have a problem with it," said Bradshaw. "For the sake of the economy and jobs, it would be good to rebuild."

Labels: Chemical Safety Board