Daddy, Where Do Baseballs Come From?

Daddy: Good question, little Billy. All of the baseballs in the major leagues come from one factory in a country called Costa Rica where workers stich each and every ball together by hand.

Little Billy: They must make a lot of money. A major league baseball costs about $15 in the store.

Daddy: Well, actually, they get paid about $.30 a ball, which comes to about $2,750 a year.

Little Billy: Hmm. Hmm. So who get's the rest of the money?

Daddy: The owners of the company who provide the jobs.

Little Billy: Oh, I see. Is $2,750 a lot of money? How much to professional baseball player make a year?

Daddy: Oh, a little over $2 million, on average.

Little Billy: Oh. Hmm. But it must be fun making baseballs.

Daddy: Well, kind of. Although it gets kind of hot. Sometimes it gets up to 95 degrees and workers feel like they're suffocating.

Little Billy: Ewww. But they must be really good with their hands to make balls. Right?

Daddy: As long as they can still use their hands. Have you ever heard of something called "Carpal Tunnel Syndrome?"

Little Billy: Daddy, can you tell me a different story? This is making me sad.

Daddy: OK, sure. What else do you want to know, Little Billy?

Little Billy: Where do my sneakers come from?


The whole story is here.

Even Corrections Officers Deserve To Come Home Alive

Throughout the 1990's a group of unions primarily representing health care, social service and retail workers, lobbied federal and state OSHA's for guidelines and enforcement action against employers whose employees were killed, hurt or threatened by preventable assaults. We made some progress at federal OSHA in health care and late night retail. OSHA issued guidelines and cited a handful of employers. Several state plans -- including California, Washington, Minnesota and Indiana -- made similar efforts in the health care and retail sectors.

One sector in which we never could make progress was corrections. "Hey, prisons are inherently dangerous places to work. They're full of people who want to kill you. How can you cite a prison for violence?" they laughed. "That's like citing a beach for getting wet."

Well, actually, no. Corrections officers should be able to say, just like every other worker, "We just came to work here, we didn't come to die." There are good procedures that, if enforced, are designed to minimize or even completely prevented assaults on corrections officer. So then why shouldn't OSHA be able to cite an institution if such recognized practices are not being followed, just as it could cite any other workplace for not providing safe working conditions?

Unfortunately, we have an example of how a preventable death can result from non-compliance with working procedures. Last June I reported about the death of Darla Lathrem, 38, at the Charlotte Correctional Institution in Florida. Lathrem, who was armed only with pepper spray and a radio, was attacked and killed by three inmates who then attempted to escape. Her body was discovered stashed in a locked closet amid the chaos of the attempted breakout.

A report on Lathrem's murder has just been released and showed that a number of prison procedures had not been followed that night:

• Staff members failed to have two officers supervising the inmates who were working on the dormitories.
  
  
• With inmates working at 10 p.m., no one was making sure that manpower was being utilized properly beyond normal hours at the construction site.
  
  
• No one was enforcing the policy which mandates all employees wear a body alarm.
  
  
• The inmates were not restrained during movement.
  
  
• Policies regarding key control were not followed.
  
  
• Policies regarding sensitive tools were not followed.
  
  
• Security checks were not in place or monitored to make sure policies were enforced.

Now, given that a number of the institution's own safety policies were not being followed, is there any more reason that this workplace should not be cited by OSHA than any other workplace that isn't following safe working procedures? (Overlooking the fact that this is a state prison in Florida, one of 26 states that don't provide OSHA coverage for public employees.)

I also want to point out one more item in this report that may be of value when investigating accidents in your own workplace. Lathrem was not wearing a body alarm even though prison policy mandates that a body alarm be worn at all times. How many times in similar situations have you seem accident reports that list "Worker not following [whatever] procedure" as the cause of the accident?

But not in this case. Instead, the report correctly concluded that "No one was enforcing the policy which mandates all employees wear a body alarm." Even though prison department policy requires that all officers wear the alarm when inside the secure perimeter, the report noted that the majority of the officers on duty that night were not wearing the device. What we have is a management system failure -- a failure to enforce safe working procedures -- rather than a "blame the worker" for not following procedures.

More here and here, and an article about Darla Lathrem's family here.

-----

Ed. Note: I was made aware of the existence of this report by an observant reader. Believe it or not, I don't have the time to read every newspaper in the United States, and depend on many of you (yes, YOU) to bring information to my attention. Thanks and keep it coming.

-- Jordan.

Who's A Deserter? Just the Facts Ma'am

Those of you who watched last week's Democratic Debate in New Hampshire saw Peter Jennings attack Presidential Candidate Wesley Clark for not disavowing Clark- supporter Michael Moore's statement that our President is a deserter. And you may have also noticed the press tsk tsking that Clark didn't know whether the statement was true or not. Imagine! Our fearliess leader being accused of being a deserter. How unpresidential.

Well, we're experts on workplace safety, not military law. So make up your own mind. The facts are at Michael Moore's Website (which has links to all of the news accounts of Bush's military service) and the Daily Howler which also has some interesting things to say.

The Weekly Toll

Woman Killed in Spraying Machine

Williamsport, MD - GST AutoLeather near Williamsport was running on a limited production schedule Thursday as Maryland Occupational Safety and Health personnel investigated the death of a woman who was killed Wednesday while operating a spraying machine at the plant.

Deanna L. Stottlemyer, 37, of Martinsburg, W.Va., died Wednesday afternoon when she got caught in one of the rollers on spraying machine No. 3 at the Clear Spring Road plant, Dr. Edward Ditto III, the deputy medical examiner for Washington County, said after the accident.

GST AutoLeather has incurred 45 violations of Occupational Safety and Health Administration codes, half of them serious, since 1988, a number the company said is meaningless since it has corrected each of the infractions. Huh?

Worker dies in fall through roof of job site

A 47-year-old worker died after he fell through the roof of a Salt Lake City recycling plant Friday afternoon. David Bird, of West Valley City, was one of three contractors working on top of the Weyerhaeuser Recycling building. (Scroll Down).

Man Killed in Conveyor Belt

Harnett County (NC) man died Friday after his arm got caught in a conveyor belt at a concrete plant, authorities said.

Karl William Perry, 42, of Broadway somehow became entangled in the belt at the Thomas Concrete operation near Fuquay-Varina. There were no witnesses.

Fatal industrial accidents being probed
Forklift driver, roofer killed

The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration and area law enforcement agencies on Friday were investigating two industrial accidents that claimed the lives of two men Wednesday in Brown County, WI.

Matthew Murphy, 22, of Seymour was putting shingles on a Wrightstown home when he apparently lost his balance and fell about 15 to 20 feet to the frozen ground, said Al Klimek, interim Brown County medical examiner.

In the second accident, Mark Kreuser, 40, of Green Bay died after being crushed while using a forklift to unload a truck at Valley Cabinet in De Pere at 8:25 a.m., Klimek said. Investigators weren’t sure how the accident happened.

Golf course worker, 61, dies in accident

A 61-year-old Upstate golf course maintenance worker, Karl Phillip Anken, died after a machine he was riding flipped on a hill and pinned him, authorities said.

Anken had been riding the sprayer near the course's 10th hole when he tried to turn on a steep hill, causing the machine to fall on top of him, maintenance worker Travis McMahan said

Two Die In Fall From Scaffolding

Walking out on a wooden plank more than 40 feet above the ground at a Hartford construction site Thursday, Luis Mendes and William Kelly put their faith in a scaffolding system being overseen by a Vernon contractor that has been cited for numerous labor violations in recent years - including two last year for erecting unsafe scaffoldings.

But the joist holding the plank in place suddenly failed about 9:30 a.m., officials said. The plank flipped up, plunging Mendes, 47, the owner of a Terryville roofing subcontractor, and Kelly, his 48-year-old employee, to the ground and their deaths.

Resident evicted from Canton YMCA kills worker, self

Canton, OH - A YMCA maintenance worker was shot and killed Thursday by a resident who was being evicted for violating shelter rules, police said.

The resident, Jeffrey Marshall, 69, shot and killed himself after shooting Charles P. Hinton Jr., of Canton, about 10:30 a.m., police said.

Worker killed when vehicle plunges into rock quarry

One worker was killed when a chunk of land plunged into a water-filled rock quarry, taking two men and their vehicles with it.

The men, whose names were not released Wednesday, were working for Finley Properties on a project to fill in the quarry, Birmingham Fire and Rescue Service spokesman Capt. C.W. Mardis said.

Worker dies at RadioShack site

FORT WORTH - A construction worker died Monday afternoon when the elevated equipment he was working on at the future RadioShack headquarters tipped over, fire officials said.

The 38-year-old victim was identified as Robert Fitts of Dallas.

Worker dies in paper mill accident

MIDDLETOWN, OH -- A paper mill worker who went alone to fix a torn roll of paper was found dead underneath the machine minutes later, police said.

Kenneth Johnson Jr., 27, of nearby Carlisle, was pronounced dead shortly after the accident at 1:40 p.m. Saturday at Bay West.

Man killed by machinery at FedEx terminal

A Shaler, PA, man was killed while working the overnight shift at the FedEx Ground delivery terminal in Neville Island, apparently after a piece of his clothing got caught in a conveyor belt.

Ed Seelhorst, 37, of Fall Run Road, was found dead at 4:15 a.m. Thursday in what is believed to be the first fatal accident in the company's history.

Worker Killed After Pulled Into Machine Mixing Cement

ALABAMA -- A worker was killed in south Phoenix after he was pulled into a machine that mixes cement.

The Phoenix Fire Department said the victim was doing maintenance on the machine while it was running and became trapped in the rollers of the machine.

The accident occurred at a company called Ameron International, which makes concrete cylinders and drainage pipes.

Accident kills construction worker

EGG HARBOR TOWNSHIP, NJ - A worker was killed Tuesday morning when a steel beam being put into place at a home under construction here fell on him.

The worker, Jaquenane DosSanto, 27, suffered injuries to his face, neck and chest area, and was pronounced dead at the scene.

According to authorities, the worker was part of a team installing the 20-foot support beam in the area of the home's partially completed basement section at about 7:45 a.m. The worker reportedly was standing on a ladder below ground when the beam fell, dropping on him and causing him to tumble to the basement floor.

Lifeboat plunge kills worker

Portland, ME -- One man was killed and two co-workers were injured Tuesday when a lifeboat they were testing fell from chains attached to a giant oil rig and plunged into Portland Harbor. Andrew J. Caldwell, 49, was pronounced dead at the scene. More here.

Driver killed while unloading truck

VISTA, CA– A truck driver was killed yesterday when he was pinned under metal storage racks that he was helping unload at the future site of a distribution center for golf products, authorities said.

The driver, identified as Tex Ramey, 65, of Kingston, Tenn., died at the Sycamore Vista Business Park site at 9:41 a.m., the Medical Examiner's Office said. Ramey drove for Mercer Transportation Co., which is based in Louisville, Ky.

Carryout Worker Murdered

Two days after a North Toledo carryout worker was killed during a robbery, city officials yesterday urged small businesses to improve their security measures, with Mayor Jack Ford saying he may use loans or grants to help pay for the upgrades.

City officials called Misada Shalan's murder inside Tamara's Carryout senseless, brutal, and vicious and offered a $5,000 reward - matched by a local carryout owner - for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the killers.

Worker Killed After Fall Down Elevator Shaft

BALTIMORE, MD -- Baltimore fire officials say a construction worker died Tuesday morning after falling inside an elevator shaft.

Fire spokesman Kevin Cartwright said emergency crews were called to a building under construction on North Howard Street around 7 a.m.

He says the man was working on the elevator when it jolted. The man lost his balance and fell from the 10th floor to the 7th floor.

Heart Attacks and Workplace Death

When I was working at OSHA, I received monthly copies of the "FAT-CAT" report, short for "Fatalities and Catastrophes." The fatalities always contained a number of "natural cause" deaths, usually heart attacks, that were never investigated by OSHA. I always wondered what one might find if one investigated them. For example, are there more "heart attacks" during hot weather that may actually have been heat-related? Did workers ever have heart attacks who might also have been working near toxic chemicals? Did anyone ever actually go out to the worksite to check out the circumstances?

I was reminded of workplace heart attack problem when I came across an this article about OSHA fining a company for the confined space death of Rodney Jones from hydrogen sulfide exposure in a unmonitored manhole last August. Manholes are notorious for confined space hazards -- hydrogen sulfide, methane or oxygen deprivation -- and OSHA has a confined space standard that requires monitoring, ventilation and an attendant to prevent such deaths.

I went back to read the original article about the incident. Jones' co-worker and friend Mike Radford climbed down to try to rescue him and was also overcome by the gas. Both were rescued and taken to a hospital where Jones died a couple of days later.

"His big ol' heart couldn't take it anymore," Radford said.

Radford said Jones suffered from heart attacks in the past, and that's what killed him Sunday night. He believes it was triggered by the poisonous gas.

Heart attack or workplace-related fatality? I'm not even sure how this was recorded by OSHA, but it's pretty clear that Rodney Jones would be alive today if the confined space standard had been followed.

Lies and the Lying Vice Presidents Who Tell Them

I created this blog to write about health and safety issues and a little politics, but there are plenty of blogs that go much deeper into the screwed up politics of the country. But this story about our "leader" lying about Iraq is worth discussing though because the lying is becoming pathological and it has implications for everything the Bush administration touches.

Anyone listening to Morning Edition the other day may have been started out of their morning reveries when they heard Dick Cheney -- apparently with a straight face -- persist in claiming that we had found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and that there was "overwhelming evidence" of strong links between Saddam Hussein and Al Queda. Unfortunately, the interviewer, Juan Williams, did not pursue the obvious lies with follow-up questions.

The Los Angeles Times did, however, follow-up on Cheney's lies:

• "We've found a couple of semi-trailers at this point which we believe were in fact part of [a WMD] program," Cheney said. "I would deem that conclusive evidence, if you will, that he did in fact have programs for weapons of mass destruction."
  
  That view is at odds with the judgment of the government's lead weapons inspector, David Kay, who said in an interim report in October that "we have not yet been able to corroborate the existence of a mobile [biological weapons] production effort."
  
  
• There's overwhelming evidence there was a connection between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi government," Cheney said in an interview on National Public Radio. "I am very confident that there was an established relationship there."
  
  That assertion appeared at odds with the recent words of other senior administration officials, including Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, who said in an interview this month that he had "not seen smoking-gun, concrete evidence" of connections between Iraq and Al Qaeda.
  
  ***
  
• Since the war, as the administration has sought to deflect charges that it exaggerated the Iraqi threat, Cheney has appeared reluctant to give ground. On occasion, this has created public relations problems for the White House.
  
  After Cheney implied in a television interview in September that Iraq was involved in the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush was forced to acknowledge days later that the administration "had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved" in Sept. 11.
  
  The White House had no comment Thursday on Cheney's remarks.

So , is Cheney dumb? Misinformed? No, according to Kevin Drum at CalPundit,

What he is is a vice president. And a smart politician. And he knows perfectly well that most people pay only vague attention to what they hear and pay no attention at all to the followups from serious reporters. Millions of people turned on the radio and heard Cheney say that we've found both WMD and al-Qaeda links, but only thousands read the LA Times and discovered that he's pretty much the only person who thinks so.

Net result: millions more people believe the WMD and al-Qaeda fantasies. Cheney's boss, of course, will never say anything this direct — even though he had a chance just three days ago — and if this heats up the White House will simply issue a low-key "explanation" of Cheney's remarks that will be published on page 23 of most major metro dailies.
This is a very smart, very deliberate strategy. Don't ever believe otherwise.

Let me repeat that one line: "most people pay only vague attention to what they hear and pay no attention at all to the followups from serious reporters." And not just about Iraq, they will lie about every important issue and we can't depend on the media to follow up or for people to notice the follow-ups. That leaves it up to you, who are reading this. You've been appointed to the truth squad. We've got about 10 months to get the truth out there. Go do it.

Yet Another Trench Death

But a good article

I was having a drink with a friend and colleague earlier this evening and we were complaining about how the excellent series of workplace safety articles by David Barstow in the NY Times had not yet seemed to inspire other reporters to do more indepth articles when workers die. We generally get three or four paragraphs describing the death, the mourning family, and the company SHOCKED that such a freak accident could have happened. And then maybe six months later there's a short article about the OSHA fine.

And, as usual, I come home, turn on the computer and find the same old story of yet another preventable death in a 12-foot deep unshored trench makes me want to scream:

Donald DeHart knew the trench he was working in was dangerous, and he feared for his life, his wife said Wednesday.

"He had told me a few days before that - two, three days in a row - that it was going to happen," Wanda DeHart said. "He told me, he said, `If it caves in I'm not going to make it.'"

A partial collapse covered his feet in the days before the one that buried him in a 12-foot-deep trench Monday, DeHart said. It took rescue workers 11 hours to recover his body.

Because her husband worked as a day laborer, his wife will get no workers' compensation for his death.

The only silver lining to this tragedy was a very good article in the Ashville Citizen Times:

The death of Donald DeHart leaves a bereft family and a number of unanswered questions about why he was at the bottom of a ditch 12 feet deep that hadn't been shored up.

OSHNC standards require that any trench deeper than 5 feet must be shored up on its sides or sloped to reduce the danger of collapse. Such a trench must also have ramps, runways or other safe methods of access and egress, according to Juan Santos, a spokesman for the N.C. Department of Labor. After DeHart was found, David Walker, public information officer for Garren Creek Fire Department and Fairview Fire and Rescue said, "It just seems the trench could have been made safe. I work for the U.S. Forest Service and we have a saying: `You have a right to a safe assignment.' I think everybody should have that right."

The accident that claimed DeHart's life reminds us that OSHNC regulations are not just another way for a government bureaucracy to harass employers and workers. They are in place because obeying those rules saves lives. If the ditch that collapsed on DeHart had been constructed according to OSHNC standards, DeHart would almost certainly be alive today. Yet, both employers and employees often ignore OSHNC regulations because complying would cost extra money or take additional time. The price for not doing so can be far more dear than an OSHNC fine.

This is the kind of writing that needs to appear in every local newspaper and television news whenever a worker is killed in this country. People need to be educated over and over again that these deaths are not inevitable, they're not really even accidents. They are crimes and should be treated accordingly.

The Real State of The Nation

Burlington (PA) County Times columnist Suzanne Blanchard exposes (and documents) some of the myths of Chimpster's speech. Among them

Small business owners and employees" need "relief from needless Federal regulation."

• Nearly 8 million higher wage workers will lose their rights to overtime pay under a Bush administration regulation.
  
  
• The administration touts 1.3 million low-income workers who will gain overtime pay under the proposition.
  
  
• The Department of Labor is actively advising employers how to avoid paying those newly-qualified low-income workers overtime.
  
  
• President Bush advocated for and signed the first ever legislative repeal of a work safety standard (on ergonomics), though the rule took more than ten years to develop.
  
  
• The Bush administration withdrew or halted action on 16 pending Occupational Safety and Health Administration and 13 pending Mine Safety and Health Administration safety actions.
  
  
• OSHA delayed implementation of rules protecting workers from exposure to tuberculosis. (Ed. Note: Actually he dropped the proposed standard.)
  
  
• The 2004 Bush administration budget cut $3 million from OSHA safety and health standards development, federal enforcement, worker safety and health training grants and safety and health statistics, while adding $7.2 million for employer-controlled compliance assistance.
  
  
• The 2003 Bush budget took $29 million out of funding for the National Institutes for Occupational Safety and Health. The 2004 budget took $27 million more away.

Read the rest. And there are more myths and facts about the State of the Union here.

I've Got Mail!

I don't get a lot of comments on this site, and almost all of those that I get are very supportive. How boring. So it was with great interest that I read a note from Kurt Hartle today who had a few things to say about my posting on Labor and the Iowa Caucuses.

It's just like you "died in the wool" democrates to think that your own constituancey is too stupid to make the "right decision".

Dear Kurt:

Thanks for your note. I'm glad you're reading Confined Space. Unfortunately you seem to have completely missed the point I was trying to make. So let me try again.

First, I've done a word-search and I never even mentioned the word "stupid."

In the article above you admit to having to tell union employees, "who to vote for"

Actually, that's not at all what I said. In fact, I said just the opposite. What I "admitted" was that "Following the disastrous 1994 election, the labor movement finally realized that it was no longer adequate to just tell members who to vote for. They wanted to decide for themselves, based on the issues."

That's because they're smart, not stupid.

and then when that didn't work, you were serving up a plater of propaganda

I don't think I mentioned the word "propaganda" either. What I actually said was "The secret was to educate union members about the issues [and] tell them where each candidate stands."

Let me explain what I meant. Pollsters have found that white men who belong to unions have roughly the same opinions about political issues (health care, education, taxes, etc.) as white men who don't belong to unions. Yet, in the 2000 elections, a majority of white men voted for George Bush, while a majority of union white men voted for Al Gore. Why was this?

It was because most who watch T.V. (especially Fox) only know what George Bush says, unions educate people about what George Bush actually does. For example, ask people whether they're in favor of George Bush's tax policy where 40 percent of the tax breaks, hundreds of billions of dollars, to go to the top 1 percent, or whether those breaks should be spread around more fairly and be used for education or lowering the deficit. I'd bet most white men would say they should be spread around more fairly, yet they voted for George Bush.

Ask Americans whether millions of people should lose their overtime pay. I bet almost all white men would say no, but most say they'll vote for Bush. Ask people whether they like our health care system (especially the 47 million who don't have insurance). I bet most would say no, but lots of those would still vote for George Bush.

and "then hope like hell they put it together and vote correctly" - (Your words, not mine).

Yes! Finally. My exact words. You're right this time. Two out of three ain't bad.

May be it's not them or the Repbulicans that are so stupid. You own a mirror?

Actually, I own several mirrors, but I never get to look at myself because my daughters are always in front of them.

And I don't think anyone who votes for George Bush or the Republican party is stupid. They just believe the lies they are told. When they are told the truth by the unions they belong to, they tend to vote overwhelmingly for the candidates who best represent their interests -- the Democrats.

As Adlai Stevenson said

I have been thinking that I would make a proposition to my Republican friends...that if they will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we will stop telling the truth about them.

Thanks again for writing.

-- Jordan

Intro to Death By Trench Collapse

I reported last month about the death of James Randal Helton in a trench collapse. You may remember that the owner of the company claimed that "his crews were doing everything correctly."

Apparently the firefighters who recovered Helton's body came in for some criticism

Gwinnett firefighters were scolded by some workers and media last month when a 20-year-old construction worker was buried under tons of dirt in a trench collapse in Buford. Firefighters worked for seven hours before they were able to recover James Randal Helton's lifeless body. Some onlookers felt the rescuers were moving too slowly, according to Capt. David Dusik, spokesman for the Gwinnett Fire Department.

In order to impress upon people how trenches kill and safe rescue must be done, the Gwinnett Fire Department simulated trench rescue in order to educate people about trench safety.

Fire Department Spokesman Capt. David Dusik explained that

all the precautions are necessary because 60 percent of fatalities in trench rescues involve would-be rescuers. Soil that has already been disturbed is unstable, and the risk of secondary collapse must be eliminated before firefighters can risk entering a trench.

Which reminds me of a story (that I've told before, but it's my Blog, so I'll tell it again.)

A few years ago, humorist Dave Barry wrote a column making fun of OSHA for citing a company whose workers had jumped into a collapsed trench to (successfully) rescue workers from another company who had been trapped when the trench collapsed. Barry cited it as another example of government stupidity.

Although I thought the OSHA citation in this case was probably unnecessary (and was later dropped), as it was another company's employees trapped in the trench, I sent a letter to Barry defending the principle of the citation and the OSHA standard, and describing the frequency of deaths among rescuers in confined space and trenching incidents. I also enclosed some news clips and a NIOSH report. He wrote me back, replying "Yeah, well if it was your friend, I bet you'd jump in too."

Yeah Dave, and there's a good chance I'd die....

Anyway, back to the story. Dusek also made the point that each foot of soil weighs between 1,200 and 1,500 pounds, which means that

a person buried alive would lose consciousness in approximately one minute and would die within five minutes. Even those buried only partially can suffer hypothermia if the soil is too cold or be compressed so much that they later die from internal injuries.

All of which makes these guys incredibly lucky.

Another Wasted Life; Another Employer Avoids Jail

OSHA fined Triram Corp. $52,000 for killing a worker who was blown off an asphalt tank after they told him to weld on it.

Christopher Lyon, 31, of Brooklyn, Conn., was killed in the accident.

Investigators at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration said Triram Corporation instructed Lyon to work on the tank without telling him what was inside, or the dangers of working near heated asphalt's flammable vapors.

That amounted to a "willful" violation, OSHA said, meaning it was committed with intentional disregard or plain indifference to OSHA requirements.

Add another one to the NY Times list of employers who got way cheap after knowingly putting workers into a situation that killed them.

The company boasts that

The products and services offered by Triram Corporation, an affiliate of the Hudson Asphalt Group, proudly reflect our enduring commitment to providing superior customer service at all times.

Too bad they don't have an "enduring commitment" to provide a safe workplace for their employees.

More here.

Snake of the Nation

For the first time in three years, I actually watched an entire Chimpy speech. Normally I get nauseated after fifteen minutes of Dubyanocchio, but I figured this is Smirky's last SOTU, so....

If you missed it, others have characterized it much better than I would be able to. (All I can do is splurt and sputter and pray that I'll wake up and it will be the morning of November 8, 2000 and, and this will all have been a long nightmare and, and....)

Thanks to Susan Madrak at Suburban Guerrilla, you can read Al Franken's account here and Susan's outrage below. Calpundit has the play-by-play here.

Labor and the Iowa Caucuses

Predictions of the demise of labor's electoral clout as a result of the Iowa caucuses are premature. Labor unions were successful yesterday in getting the vote out. 23% of Iowa caucus attendees were members of unions -- a disproportionately high figure compared with the 13.6% of Iowa workers who belong to unions.

(While the labor turnout amounted to one-third of caucus attendees in 2000, the overall turnout yesterday was over 60% higher than in 2000. This, in addition to the fact that labor density has fallen significantly in Iowa since 1999 probably means -- according to my calculations -- that labor turnout was equal to, or greater than the 2000 turnout.)

Where the unions didn't succeed was in selling one (or two) specific labor candidates-- because there weren't one (Gephardt) or two (Dean) candidates who stood head & shoulders above the others on issues important to labor. In fact, all the Democratic candidates had good labor positions.

Following the disastrous 1994 election, the labor movement finally realized that it was no longer adequate to just tell members who to vote for. They wanted to decide for themselves, based on the issues. The secret was to educate union members about the issues, tell them where each candidate stands, get them to the polls (by firing them up & addressing logistics), then hope like hell they'll put it all together and vote correctly.

And this is how labor has been successful lately -- especially in 2000. It didn't work so well in 2002, because members weren't fired up by the weak Democratic response to Bush & stayed home.

In Iowa yesterday, union members came out in large numbers, but made up their own minds, based on the information they had (much of it supplied by the unions), about who to vote for.

Contrary to the Iowa caucuses being a loss for labor, I think this bodes well for labor's influence in November as long as the education process goes well AND the Democratic candidate presents a real alternative. On the other hand, while the results of the Iowa caucuses were not necessarily bad for labor in general, they were bad for the individual unions that put a lot of resources into individual candidates, perhaps leaving AFSCME's Gerald W. McEntee (and SEIU's Andy Stern) the angriest men in America (to paraphrase Mark Schmitt at the Decembrist).

The real issue that the defeat of Dean and Gephardt in Iowa raises is a serious question about the advisability of committing significant resources to primary contests where there are a number of viable labor-friendly candidates. While it is important for unions to keep the pressure on the Democratic candidates to push for issues important to working people (health care, jobs, etc.), perhaps in this situation (where all the Democratic candidates are acceptable) it would have been better for unions to keep their powder dry until the Democratic dust settles, the stark differences between the Democratic and Republican candidates are more evident, and the real battle for the future of this country begins.

Warm Up For Snake Of The Nation

Susan Madrack at Suburban Guerrilla pointed out these two articles, both today, in the NY Times. One is about a single mother whose children were sent temporarily to foster care until she dealt with anger and parenting issues. But now that she's been ruled fit to parent, she can't get them back because she can't find an apartment big enough to satisfy Social Services. Meanwhile, back at the ranch,

The Bush administration, which created a record budget deficit partly through tax cuts for the rich, is threatening to make up some of the difference by cutting desperately needed programs aimed at the poor. One candidate for the chopping block is Section 8, the federal rent-subsidy program whose main purpose is preventing low-income families from becoming homeless.

As Susan says, "Apparently no one thought to make a connection between them. But then again, who's working at the Times who even gets such things? They write about sweaters."

Meanwhile a colleague (what would I do without my staff of readers?) pointed out another pre-SOTU NY Times article about Caroline Payne:

Caroline Payne embraces the ethics of America. She works hard and has no patience with those who don't. She has owned a house, pursued an education and deferred to the needs of her child. Yet she can barely pay her bills. Her earnings have hovered in a twilight between poverty and minimal comfort, usually between $8,000 and $12,000 a year.

She is the invisible American, unnoticed because she blends in. Like millions at the bottom of the labor force who contribute to the country's prosperity, Caroline's diligence is a camouflage. At the convenience store where she works, customers do not see that she struggles against destitution.

I can hardly wait to see how he's going to handle these problems. I'm sure they're on the top of his list. I'm sure of it.

Workplace Violence: Fashionable vs. Unfashionable

I used to be one of the nation's leading experts in workplace violence. But I was into workplace violence before it became fashionable. And even then, I was mostly interested in the unfashionable kind of workplace violence.

Unfashionable workplace violence happened when mental health or social service workers got beaten up or killed working in understaffed institutions or making house calls in neighborhoods that the police wouldn't go into with guns drawn. Late night retail clerks who were victims of robberies -- often poor brown-skinned types -- were also on the unfashionable side of the ledger. It was largely these incidents that led workplace violence to become the second leading cause of death in the workplace in the mid 1990's.

The more fashionable kind of workplace violence focused the demented, mentally unstable worker (aren't they all?) -- often postal workers -- who would come into work armed to the teeth and blow away their bosses and a few co-workers for good measure. These were fashionable because, unlike the unfashionable crowd, they got lots of press and provided fodder for armies of consultants who would scare employers into paying large sums for how to screen job applicants (or current employees) who might turn violent. And for good measure, they'd also counsel employers on how to fire people in a way that would minimize the chance that they might come back in and blow you away.

Instead of generating profit-making consultants, unfashionable workplace violence focused on boring issues like staffing levels in institutions, lockdrop safes and windows in retail establishments that left a clear view to the street, and locked doors and security guards for social service agencies. Instead of making money, these preventive measures cost money.

The problem with the fashionable workplace violence, is that it was largely a myth. So-called "worker-on-worker" or "internecine" violence never amounted more than about 7% of all workplace violence, even though it received close to 97% of the press.

A lot of the controversy and false claims have died down over the past few years. So I reacted with a combination of nostalgia and nausea when a colleague showed me a headline in Occupational Health and Safety Magazine that read "defusing the explosive worker," accompanied by a photo of two hands in handcuffs.

But the article didn't start out too bad. After leading with the fact that fatalities from workplace violence are falling, although it still remains the second leading cause of workplace death, the author noted accurately that

Robbery remained the primary motive of job-related homicide, accounting for 85 percent of the deaths. Disputes among co-workers, customers, and clients accounted for approximately one-tenth of the total. Factors that might increase a worker's risk for workplace assault as defined by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health are: 1) contact with the public; 2) exchange of money; 3) delivery of passengers, goods, or services; 4) having a mobile workplace, such as a taxicab or public cruiser; 5) working with unstable or volatile persons in health care, social services, or criminal justice settings; 6) working alone or in small numbers; 7) working late at night or during early morning hours; 8) working in high-crime areas; 9) guarding valuable property or possessions; and 10) working in community-based settings.

The article also noted the two OSHA guidelines (for health care workers and for late night retail), and correctly identified many of the engineering and administrative controls that have proven successful in preventing violent incidents. These include physical barriers (such as bulletproof enclosures), pass-through windows in late night retail, or deep service counters, alarm systems and panic buttons, elevated vantage points, clear visibility of service and cash register areas, bright and effective lighting, adequate staffing, arranging furniture to prevent entrapment and cash-handling controls, such as using drop safes.

I was about to figure that this was yet another episode of "When Bad Headline Writers Meet Good Articles," when I read the following paragraph:

Studies by The Workplace Violence Research Institute of Palm Springs, Calif., show an armed intruder is not the chief threat workers face. The institute's definition of workplace violence is "Any act against an employee that creates a hostile work environment and negatively affects the employee, either physically or psychologically. These acts include all types of physical or verbal assaults, threats, coercion, intimidation, and all forms of harassment." (emphasis added)

Now that's a pretty broad definition of workplace violence -- one that would in some ways fit almost any workplace in America, and a definition that many workers could use to describe the work environment imposed by management.

Then the article moves to the favorite -- and most discredited -- pastime of workplace violence consultants: the worker profile. And employers whose workplace has characteristics that fit the above description (and whose doesnt?) had better pay attention or else face "huge liabilities" for "negligent hiring" or "negligent retention."

Negligent hiring occurs when prior to hiring, the employer knew or should have known a particular applicant was not fit for the job. Negligent retention occurs when an employer becomes aware of an employee's unsuitability and fails to act. (emphasis added)

What's the problem with profiling? Looking back at violent incidents, almost every perpetrator of a violent incident in the workplace fits one or more of these characteristics, but so do millions of others who, while perhaps being irritating, would never commit a violent act.

I've listed a number of the "pre-incident indicators" that the employer had better know. Note that many of them include characteristics of what many would consider to be an active union representative. An employer who really is "out to get" someone can easily find ways to match him or her with these warning signs.

• an unexplained increase in absenteeism; (which could be a workplace health or stress problem, or a disease that the worker would like to keep confidential)
• depression and withdrawal;
• unprovoked, explosive outbursts of anger or rage; (perhaps a bit more stress than usual?)
• threats or verbal abuses of co-workers and supervisors; (this, like other items, may be an indicator or the general workplace environment.)
• frequent vague physical complaints; (or, we could have not repealed the ergonomics standard)
• behavior suggestive of paranoia; (just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you -- especially if you're a union activist.)
• having a plan to "solve all problems"; (of course, in some workplaces this might be welcome)
• resistance and over-reaction to procedural changes; (like it would be overreacting to resist mandatory overtime or violations of the contract)
• empathy with individuals committing violence; (don't even think about making Bush/Iraq jokes here)
• repeated violations of company policy; (There's always some company policy that is being violated at any given moment

And don't forget to watch out for these dangerous characters:

• white male 35-45 years of age;
• a migratory job history; (hear that brown-skinned folk from south of the border)
• a loner with little or no family or social support; (see above)
• chronically disgruntled; (Don't worry, be happy)

Anyway, you get the idea. At best, articles such as these prey upon employers' irrational fears of gun-toting angry workers and massive lawsuits, as well as their desire for an easy test to resolve the "problem." At worst, it provides employers with a justification for getting rid of any worker to tries to rock the boat, stand up to arbitrary supervision, raise workplace health problems, or -- horrors-- organize other workers.

On the other hand

Do not, however, mistake my hostility toward profiling as a minimization of the need to address workers who harass, threaten or assault other employees. I made the mistake when I was at ASFCME of assuming that we could ignore "worker-on-worker" violence because it resulted in relatively few fatalities compared to more serious causes. I'll never forget getting a call from a steward relating how he had celebrated "saving" the job of a worker who had been accused of threatening other workers. The problem was that the other members of the union were really pissed off. "The guy really was a menace. We'd been trying to get rid of him for years, and then you save his job!"

I won't go into the solutions to this problem here, but if you're interested in a union approach, check out AFSCME's handbook on Preventing Workplace Violence, especially Chapter 5. For a reasonable employer approach, check out the federal Office Personnel Management's Dealing with Workplace Violence.

Also, my objection to "profiling" doesn't mean that there aren't certain indicators of increased risk of serious violence that workers should be aware of. These indicators focus not on personality characteristics, but on actual behavior, such as actually making threats against people, bringing a weapon into the workplace, or drug and alcohol abuse.

The bottom line is that any workplace violence policy should focus on the real risks of violence. It does little good to start profiling workers in a futile attempt to predict when one may go over the edge, while in the real workplace, workers are actually getting attacked by clients or clients. Second, any attempt to address workplace violence should be addressed jointly by management and the union.

Schwarzenegger's Class War: Terminate the Poor and Middle Class

Let me make one thing perfectly clear: The budget battles over cuts in government spending vs. raising taxes are not just fights over different philosophies of government, about the size of government, or attempts to "get government off of our backs." They are fundamental fights over who wins and who loses in this society, who government rewards and who it penalizes. Go one direction -- tax increases on higher incomes -- and those most able to pay for needed government services will foot some of the bill. Go the other way -- cuts in needed public services such as health care and social services -- and those least able and most in need bear the burden, not so much in money, but in pain and suffering.

We're watching the battle play out in all of its starkest dimensions right now in California with a big deficit, plus a "moderate" Republican governor's promise not to raise taxes on anyone. Despite Republican denials and name calling, there's only one way to characterize what's going on there (as well as in other states -- and the federal government for the past three years): Class War

In his campaign last fall, Mr. Schwarzenegger, a Republican, praised the Healthy Families program and vowed to do whatever he could to make sure all those who qualified for the program were enrolled. But in his budget, which is certain to be modified by the Legislature, Mr. Schwarzenegger proposed $2.7 billion in cuts in social service programs, including the cap on enrollment in Healthy Families.

Virtually every state safety net program for the poor — including Medi-Cal, welfare and programs for the infirm, the aged, the severely disabled and those living with AIDS — faces substantial reductions under the governor's spending plan.

Mr. Schwarzenegger also proposed a 10 percent reduction in fees to doctors and other medical providers under the Medi-Cal program, a move some fear will drive many providers out of the overburdened system. A court has blocked a 5 percent reduction in Medi-Cal reimbursements imposed last year, so the $462 million Mr. Schwarzenegger hopes to save from the larger reduction is hypothetical at this point.

The governor's proposal would cap health care payments for illegal immigrants, reduce state payments for in-home care of the elderly and disabled and suspend the scheduled 2005 cost-of-living increase in the state's share of the Supplemental Security Income program.

More than 75,000 legal and illegal immigrants and 110,000 children in low-income families would lose health coverage in the first year of the plan, according to Health Access, a nonprofit group that advocates expansion of coverage. The California HealthCare Foundation estimates that the plan would add 350,000 Californians to the ranks of the uninsured over the next two years.

Scharzenegger's people, of course, see no evil:

"Anyone who characterizes it as balancing the budget on the most vulnerable is just not accurate," said Rob Stutzman, the governor's communications director. "The pain is balanced throughout government."

Yeah, right. Show me one wealthy family (who, by the way, have been spared any tax increases) who have to take their kids into crowded, dirty emergency rooms every time they're sick.

Wal-Mart Enters 19th Century

Locks Workers In Overnight

It's hard to believe this kind of stuff goes on in the United States in the 21st century, and from the largest copany in the nation:

Looking back to that night, Michael Rodriguez still has trouble believing the situation he faced when he was stocking shelves on the overnight shift at the Sam's Club in Corpus Christi, Tex.

It was 3 a.m., Mr. Rodriguez recalled, some heavy machinery had just smashed into his ankle, and he had no idea how he would get to the hospital.

The Sam's Club, a Wal-Mart subsidiary, had locked its overnight workers in, as it always did, to keep robbers out and, as some managers say, to prevent employee theft. As usual, there was no manager with a key to let Mr. Rodriguez out. The fire exit, he said, was hardly an option — management had drummed into the overnight workers that if they ever used that exit for anything but a fire, they would lose their jobs.

"My ankle was crushed," Mr. Rodriguez said, explaining he had been struck by an electronic cart driven by an employee moving stacks of merchandise. "I was yelling and running around like a hurt dog that had been hit by a car. Another worker made some phone calls to reach a manager, and it took an hour for someone to get there and unlock the door."

The reason for Mr. Rodriguez's delayed trip to the hospital was a little-known Wal-Mart policy: the lock-in. For more than 15 years, Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world's largest retailer, has locked in overnight employees at some of its Wal-Mart and Sam's Club stores. It is a policy that many employees say has created disconcerting situations, such as when a worker in Indiana suffered a heart attack, when hurricanes hit in Florida and when workers' wives have gone into labor.

"You could be bleeding to death, and they'll have you locked in," Mr. Rodriguez said. "Being locked in in an emergency like that, that's not right."

Mona Williams, Wal-Mart's vice president for communications, said the company used lock-ins to protect stores and employees in high-crime areas. She said Wal-Mart locked in workers — the company calls them associates — at 10 percent of its stores, a percentage that has declined as Wal-Mart has opened more 24-hour stores.

Although Wal-Mart management claims that the lock-ins are to protect employees from crime in dangerous neighborhoods,

The main reason that Wal-Mart and Sam's stores lock in workers, several former store managers said, was not to protect employees but to stop "shrinkage" — theft by employees and outsiders.

This reasoning is depressingly similar to the 1990 catastrophe at the chicken processing plant in Hamlet, NC where more than 20 employees burned to death trying to claw themselves out of fire doors that had been locked to prevent employees from stealing chickens.

The fire exits at Wal-Mart are not locked (with a few exceptions), but employees are told that opening them will get them fired, unless there's a real fire.

And I can't believe that this is legal. According to a night supervisor

the Wal-Mart rule that generally prohibits employees from working more than 40 hours a week to avoid paying overtime played out in strange ways for night-shift employees. Mr. Cobb said that on many workers' fifth work day of the week, they would approach the 40-hour mark and then clock out, usually around 1 a.m. They would then have to sit around, napping, playing cards or watching television, until a manager arrived at 6 a.m.

Check out more outrage at Workers Comp Insider.

Warmer and Dumberer

House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo):

"It is fitting that Gore chose one of the coldest days of the year to spread false information about the Bush Administration's record on global warming. Mother Nature didn't agree with his message and neither do I. Al, it's cold outside."

National Climatic Data Center:

2003 ties as world's second-hottest year

WASHINGTON - It's cold comfort to people shivering in much of the United States right now, but 2003 tied for the world's second-hottest year, according to federal government data released yesterday.

Al Gore on Bush's Environment Policy

I'm thinking we should have elected this guy President (Oh yeah, we did.) Of course he didn't sound like this before.

So what, according to Gore, is behind the Bush Administrations Global Warming (non) policy?

Yet in spite of the clear evidence available all around us, there are many who still do not believe that Global Warming is a problem at all. And it’s no wonder: because they are the targets of a massive and well-organized campaign of disinformation lavishly funded by polluters who are determined to prevent any action to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming, out of a fear that their profits might be affected if they had to stop dumping so much pollution into the atmosphere.

And wealthy right-wing ideologues have joined with the most cynical and irresponsible companies in the oil, coal and mining industries to contribute large sums of money to finance pseudo-scientific front groups that specialize in sowing confusion in the public’s mind about global warming. They issue one misleading “report” after another, pretending that there is significant disagreement in the legitimate scientific community in areas where there is actually a broad-based consensus.

The techniques they use were pioneered years earlier by the tobacco industry in its long campaign to create uncertainty in the public’s mind about the health risks caused by tobacco smoke. Indeed, some of the very same scientific camp-followers who took money from the tobacco companies during that effort are now taking money from coal and oil companies in return for their willingness to say that global warming is not real.

The Bush Administration ... has explored new frontiers in cynicism by time and time again actually appointing the principal lobbyists and lawyers for the biggest polluters to be in charge of administering the laws that their clients are charged with violating. Some of these appointees have continued to work very closely with the outside pseudo-scientific front groups even though they are now on the public payroll.

It sounds so radical, but it's nothing but a sober factual description of what's happening in George Bush's America -- and not just environental policy -- OSHA, energy, mass media, health care and on and on.

And with the election season here, remember this

And in case after case, the policy adopted immediately after the inauguration has been the exact opposite of what was pledged to the American people during the election campaign. The promise by candidate Bush to conduct a “humble” foreign policy and avoid any semblance of “nation building” was transformed in the first days of the Bush presidency, into a frenzied preparation for a military invasion of Iraq, complete with detailed plans for the remaking of that nation under American occupation.

And in the same way, a solemn promise made to the country that carbon dioxide would be regulated as a polluting greenhouse gas was instantly transformed by the inauguration into a promise to the generators of CO2 that it would not be regulated at all.

And a seemingly heartfelt declaration to the American people during the campaign that he genuinely believed that global warming is a real problem which must be addressed was replaced after the Inauguration by a dismissive expression of contempt for careful, peer-reviewed work by EPA scientists setting forth the plain facts on at global warming.

Good stuff. Read the rest here.

And for a rather poignant review of the Gore speech, read Bob Herbert's column in the NY Times:

The fates dealt Mr. Gore and the United States a weird hand in 2000. He got the most votes but the other guy became president. And the country, its Treasury looted and its most pressing needs deliberately ignored, has been rolling backward ever since.

"This is insanity," said Mr. Gore, referring to the administration's handling of the environment. But his speech made it clear that he could just as easily have applied that sentiment to the full range of Bush-Cheney policies. History will not be kind to the chicanery that passes for governing in the Bush II administration.

How To Choose A Candidate

Paul Krugman in today's NY Times on what we need in a candidate.

The real division in the race for the Democratic nomination is between those who are willing to question not just the policies but also the honesty and the motives of the people running our country, and those who aren't.

***

A Democratic candidate will have a chance of winning only if he has an energized base, willing to contribute money in many small donations, willing to contribute their own time, willing to stand up for the candidate in the face of smear tactics and unfair coverage.

That doesn't mean that the Democratic candidate has to be a radical — which is a good thing for the party, since all of the candidates are actually quite moderate. In fact, what the party needs is a candidate who inspires the base enough to get out the message that he isn't a radical — and that Mr. Bush is.

What Would Jesus Regulate?

Who cares, he's not running for President. (And the way things are going these days, he probably wouldn't win anyway. Too anti-business. Although he does have an influential father which seems to be important these days.)

But we do have a number of Democratic candidates trying to burn the Bush. As I'm feeling lazy tonight and my kids have had too much homework, college applications, etc. for which they were in need of parental intervention, I'm going to steal shamelessly (well, actually I'm feeling a little shame) from NYCOSH (which stole from the AFL-CIO) to present you with the positions of the Presidential Candidates on workplace safety and health.

Presidential Candidates' OSHA Positions

Where do the presidential candidates stand on the issue of occupational safety and health? That was a question put to the major party presidential candidates by the AFL-CIO's Committee on Political Education, which posed a long questionnaire to the candidates, with two questions about safety and health: "How will you protect workers' safety and health on the job?" And, "Do you support or oppose a new standard to protect workers from ergonomic injuries?"

The questionnaires have been returned by nine of the ten likely candidates. The only holdout is George W. Bush. All of the candidates answered the first question with a brief statement. All of the candidates said that they support a new ergonomic standard; many did so by checking a box marked "Support." Some of the candidates also wrote something in response to the question about ergonomics. The candidates responses are listed below, with the ergonomics question second.

Wesley Clark - I strongly oppose any efforts to weaken the ability of OSHA to enforce workplace safety rules. We shouldn't ease penalties on employers who expose the workers to dangerous situations. I support legislative proposals that would increase penalties for workplace violations and encourage prosecutors to penalize violators of workplace safety standards to the fullest extent to of the law. The law protecting workers must have real deterrent value to protect workers from accidents before they happen. (Ergo) I support new standards to protect workers from ergonomic injuries.

Howard Dean - I support strengthening the authority of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. OSHA should have more resources to enforce occupational safety laws and should have streamlined authority to issue worker safety standards. Serious violations of the OSH Act should be subject to criminal penalties. (Ergo) Support.

John Edwards - The Occupational Safety and Health Administration and workplace safety laws safeguard millions of workers from hazardous work conditions and have prevented countless workplace accidents and fatalities. I will oppose budget cuts that threaten OSHA's ability to protect the safety and health of American workers and will oppose any efforts to weaken the OSHA laws. (Ergo) I believe we need a new standard to protect workers from ergonomic injuries, which are the nation's biggest workplace and safety health problem. Almost 2 million workers suffer from serious workplace injuries each year, even though these injuries can be prevented. We cannot ignore the science that now proves the correlation between repetitive movements in the workplace and serious injuries-and that certain steps have proven to be effective in reducing injuries. I voted against the Bush administration's efforts to overturn ergonomics regulations offered by the Clinton White House to prevent workplace injuries. I also helped lead the fight against anti-ergonomics Bush nominee Eugene Scalia.

Richard Gephardt - In recent years, Democrats have had to fight off Republican attempts to cut the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Shortly after gaining control of Congress, Republicans tried to cut OSHA by a third. With a pro-labor coalition, we stopped them. Our next challenge is to ensure OSHA receives greater funding and can take enforcement actions to improve workplace safety. As president, I would issue an executive order ending federal contracts for businesses with flagrant labor violations and would use a company's record on labor law compliance as a gauge of its fitness to be a contractor with the federal government. I would also restore efforts to promote an effective, pro-worker ergonomics standard. (Ergo) I have always supported an OSHA ergonomics standard, and led the fight in Congress. Republicans introduced multiple bills throughout the 1990s to block OSHA from issuing ergonomics standards. The Department of Labor had just begun working to develop the rules when the Gingrich Congress came to power in 1995. We fought hard against Republicans' attempts to stop ergonomics rules, and in 1996, despite a Republican majority, labor and its allies won the fight to get anti-worker, anti-ergonomic language out of the bill that funds the Labor Department. It was a victory and a show of strength for organized labor. Our efforts were short-lived success because President Bush, in one of his first major acts in office, signed legislation ending the worker protections afforded by the rules. Since then, the administration has done nothing but add insult to injury. A panel to "study" ergonomics appointed last December included seven management representatives and just two workplace safety efforts; just months ago, the Department of Labor stopped all recordkeeping on these injuries. It is stunning that our president has become a true adversary of workplace safety. As president I would immediately restore the rules put in place during the Clinton administration.

John Kerry - The most recent reports from the Department of Labor show that workplace injuries continue to rise, particularly for groups like Hispanic workers and miners. We need to step up enforcement action and begin to prosecute willful violators of health and safety rules. We also need an administration that recognizes the health and safety threat that workers face, whether in the form of ergonomic injury, exposure to TB, or workplace accidents. I'd start by stepping up OSHA inspections, ordering my Justice Department to vigorously prosecute the worst violators and reinstating the standards for ergonomics that the Bush Administration cancelled. (Ergo) Support.

Dennis Kuchinich - Worker safety comes from real enforcement of regulations and the fostering of worker rights. Active enforcement of safety regulations only comes with adequate staffing for the government agencies overseeing the safety and health of American workers and a change in some of our laws. The current climate of punishing workers who reveal corporate malfeasance and safety violations must be legislatively and administratively changed. (Ergo) Support.

Joseph Lieberman - I have always recognized the importance of protecting workers' safety and health on the job, and have consistently stood up to right-wing attempts to undermine work safety and health standards. In 2000, for example, I voted to defeat an amendment to the Labor-HHS Appropriations bill which would have limited the use of federal funds to implement the ergonomics rule. I am proud to have led the fight and worked with the AFL-CIO as the leading Democrat on the Governmental Affairs Committee to derail damaging regulatory reform plans that would have threatened workers' rights. As President, I will work just as hard to ensure that enforcement of the Occupational Safety and Health Act is fully funded and will vigorously oppose any Republican effort to prevent OSHA from issuing final standards protecting employees from repetitive stress injuries. (Ergo) I have always recognized the importance of protecting workers' safety and health on the job, and have fought for strong ergonomic standards.

Carol Moseley Braun - Enforcement of OSHA would be a start. Collective bargaining, and worker councils in so—called right to work states could play a major role in monitoring and reporting safety issues. If workers and employers had some sense that the bureaucracy was responsive to their concerns, OSHA could assist in creating workplaces that are safer, more productive, and more conducive to the creation of wealth. (Ergo) Support. See Howard Dean

Al Sharpton - By strengthening OSHA and making sure there is strong enforcement of OSHA's laws. (Ergo) Support

Of course, as I've often said, these promises don't mean a thing if they don't understand now and after one of them is elected that these are serious issues that concern a lot of people. So if you have the chance during this election season to question or talk with any of the candidates -- for President, Senator or Congressperson -- make safety and health one of the topics you talk about.

NYCOSH nicely distilled this from the complete AFL-CIO Committee on Political Education report which can be found here.

"It's not our intention to create an unsafe workplace"

No one ever "intends" to kill one of their employees. When you've got a lot of employees and they're working with a bunch of dangerous chemicals and doing a lot of hazardous work, it's hard to keep track of it all.

Thats one of the reasons that there are laws and standards and enforcement mechanisms that force employers to pay attention to the health and safety of their employees -- basic things like educating employees about the chemicals they are working with and minimizing their exposure.

Here we have the case of Timothy Smith, a 22 year old man about to enter his senior year in aviation mechanics at LeTourneau University in Longview, Texas. Smith was working at Spencer Environmental (now called Thermo-Fluids) a Portland, Oregon company that recycles motor oil and antifreeze. On June 10, 2003, he was told to "rinse out a 15,000-gallon wastewater tank with a high-pressure washer and vacuum, something he was not routinely asked to do. That job is usually performed by waste oil technicians."

Several times during the cleaning process, the report said, Smith asked another technician about what was in the tank, and told the technician he was experiencing chest pains and a "heavy chest." He was not wearing a respirator, investigators found.

Smith returned to work the next day, but complained to a co-worker about chest tightness. On June 12, he went to the Willamette Falls Occupational Health clinic in Clackamas for a physical, which was required because of the company's pending change in ownership. Doctors there found his lungs appeared abnormal, and that he was coughing and unable to take deep breaths, the report said.

Smith returned to Spencer Environmental that day to fill out an incident report. Under the heading "What actions could have been taken to prevent this incident," Smith wrote: "Have proper personnel clean the tanks . . ."

Smith's lungs got progressively worse. He was hospitalized twice, and finally died on July 3.

According to Spencer's records, the tanks Smith cleaned that day routinely contain hydrofluoric acid, nitric acid, sulfuric acid, phosphoric acid and acetic acid. According to the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee Department of Environmental Health, Safety and Risk Management, hydrofluoric acid is one of the strongest and most corrosive acids known.

***

Three other Spencer workers were hospitalized in May with similar symptoms. An independent medical review by Oregon Health & Science University's Center for Research on Occupational and Environmental Toxicology found that test results and symptoms pointed to exposure to hydrofluoric acid in all three cases.

Oregon OSHA fined the company $32,000 contending

that Spencer employees were not properly instructed and supervised in the safe operation of machinery, and that the company "exercised inadequate supervision, thereby potentially exposing their employees to hazards."

Investigators also found that the company did not post danger signs on wastewater tanks, had no way to determine whether a respirator was required for cleaning wastewater tanks and had inadequately trained employees.

Smith's death was not the first for Spencer:

In October 1999, Thomas Cassell, 45, of Oregon City, died shortly after being pulled unconscious from a gasoline tank at a Spencer facility in The Dalles.

Spencer was cited and fined by Oregon OSHA for violating federal safety violations related to Cassell's death. Spencer has been cited and fined four times since 1994 for other safety violations in Oregon.

Spencer was fined just under $3,000 for killing Casell in a confined space.

Have they learned their lesson and accepted responsibility? Well,

Don Spencer, who remained with Thermo-Fluids, said the company would appeal seven violations and $32,500 in fines.

"It's not our intention to create an unsafe workplace," Spencer said.

... A sentiment that I'm sure is very comforting to Tim Smith's family.

And why, one might ask after reading the recent New York Times series about death in the workplace, why isn't Oregon OSHA referring this for criminal prosecution, especially since it's the second workplace fatality in less than four years.

Good question.

More here.

Overlooking the Human Cost: Farmworkers Sue EPA Over Pesticides

Another lesson from my health and safety workshop days was that anything that ended in "cide" was poison. It may be an herbi - cide to be used against plants, or a pesti-cide to be used against bugs, or a rodenti - cide to be used against rats -- but they were all poison to the humans that apply them.

Some pesticides are more hazardous than other. Organophosphate pesticides are particularly bad, attacking the central nervous system. Some in this family have been banned or heavily restricted by EPA. But not enough. Now a number of groups representing farmworkers are suing the Environmental Protection Agency for its failure to adequately protect workers and the environment from the use of toxic pesticides.

Attorneys for the farm-worker groups, which include the United Farmworkers of America, claim that the EPA has continued to allow the use of two toxic pesticides, azinphos-methyl and phosmet, despite data showing the dangers of exposure to such chemicals.

The organophosphate pesticides, derived from nerve agents used during World War II, are neurotoxins because they can attack the nervous system, attorneys said. According to the lawsuit, Sea Mar clinicians have treated patients with headaches, vomiting, disorientation and other symptoms of pesticide poisoning.

In 2001, Washington state had the highest use of AZM among states and was third nationwide in the use of phosmet, attorneys said.

"The EPA knew there were unacceptable risks, yet went ahead and decided (in 2001) to register the pesticide ... ignoring its own data that showed how to produce apples (for example) at a profit in a way that didn't poison people," said Grant Cope, an attorney for Earthjustice.

The lawsuit alleges that EPA conducted a shortsighted cost-benefit analysis that ignored recent data and favored the economic interests of growers, many of whom use such chemicals to protect crops from pests such as insects and rodents.

Erik Nicholson of the United Farmworkers of America said the EPA "didn't factor in the human cost."

Flash! Carcinogens Actually Cause Cancer

The first lesson I'd try to communicate when teaching a health and safety class about workplace chemical exposures was that "legal doesn't mean safe. OSHA's Permissible Exposure Limits (PELs) were mostly based on voluntary standards set in the 1960's, mainly to prevent "acute" effects -- like poisoning or immediate death -- from high, short term exposures. The standards don't address the long term effects of low exposure that can result in cancer years or decades later.

Furthermore, the PELs are based on "8-hour time weighted averages," which means your exposure could be above the PEL for a period of time, as long as the 8-hour average was below the PEL. Finally, even the poor testing that had been done on the chemicals was based on exposure to one chemical at a time, not the "synergistic" effects of exposure to a combination of many chemicals together.

I've written before (here and here) about the trial being held in California over accusations by two workers, Alida Hernandez and James Moore, that their cancers are the result of chemicals exposures while working at IBM. The company denies the allegations, and while much is known about some chemicals that cause cancer, it is often difficult to prove that any specific cancer was caused by specific chemical exposures.

But now California's top occupational physician, Robert Harrison, chief of the California Department of Health's occupational health surveillance and evaluation program, has, for the first time linked the workers' exposure to their cancers.

IBM argues that its clean rooms were safe and that the chemicals used there were not believed to be carcinogenic during the time of Moore's and Hernandez's employment.

But Harrison testified that virtually all the chemicals cited in the case, including trichloroethylene, benzene and epichlorohydrin, are recognized as carcinogens either by California's Proposition 65 or scientific studies.

Proposition 65, also known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, requires the state to publish an annual list of chemicals known to cause cancer. Moore worked for IBM from 1966 to 1993 and Hernandez was employed from 1977 to 1991.

***

He estimated that exposure to chemical solvents played a 70 percent to 80 percent role in causing Hernandez's breast cancer, in relationship to other factors like her age and the early onset of puberty. He discounted factors that IBM has cited, such as weight and hormone replacement therapy, saying they were nullified by other medical conditions.

In Moore's case, Harrison said solvents played an 80 percent to 90 percent role in his non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Something Happening There...Suicides in Iraq

This isn't good, especially with all the attention the military has been putting on the psychological well-being of our military.

At least 21 U.S. troops have committed suicide in Iraq, a growing toll that represents one in seven of American "non-hostile" deaths since the war began last March, the Pentagon said on Wednesday.

The Defense Department's top health official said the military plan to deal with "battle stress" in Iraq more aggressively than in past conflicts such as the Vietnam War and the 1991 Gulf War.

"Fighting this kind of war is clearly going to be stressful for some people," Assistant Defense Secretary for Health Affairs Dr. William Winkenwerder told reporters in an interview.

"There have been about 21 confirmed suicides during the past year associated with Operation Iraqi Freedom," Winkenwerder said, adding that 18 were Army troops and three others were in the Navy and Marine Corps.

The suicide toll is probably higher than 21, he added, because some "pending" non-hostile death cases are still being investigated.

And it's getting worse:

The 21 suicides so far represent nearly 14 percent of non-hostile deaths, an increase over the proportion of 11 percent as of three months ago when the suicide number totaled 13.

The good news is that even if their spirits are broken, we're saving more of their bodies:

emergency military medical teams stationed in Iraq, combined with new body armor and other protective devices, had resulted in a sharply lower death rate among wounded soldiers compared to past wars.

In addition to the death toll, more than 2,400 troops have been wounded in Iraq since the war began.

"Clearly the body armor helps" in saving lives, Winkenwerder said. But he stressed that emergency medical teams were a key factor in preventing death from blood loss in the "golden hour" after a soldier was wounded.

UPDATE: More here in the Washington Post.

Dean: History as Prediction?

Confined Space has refrained from officially endorsing any one of the candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination. All of them have good positions on workplace health and safety policies, and issuance of an ergonomics standard.

David Broder argues today in the Washington Post that to understand how a presidential candidate will behave as President (especially those who were former governors), one must look how they governed their state.

I am somewhat skeptical of this theory, especially with the current incumbent. He argues, for example, that George Bush "gave plenty of evidence about the buddy-buddy relationship of George W. Bush and the corporate power structure in Texas."

True, but looking at Bush's gubernatorial story-line, one might also have predicted that he would govern in a bi-partisan manner, "a uniter, not a divider." Yet his administration has proven to be the most partisan and divisive in recent American history.

Broder cites a new book about Howard Dean's record as governor of Vermont and finds "the Dean who emerges from these pages is a more complex and interesting politician than the man on the stump this past year -- less strident and in many respects more impressive."

Yet, he also cites something that may serve as a warning for Confined Space readers when working in the coming years with President Dean:

The chapter on his environmental record, titled "Green and Not Green," by Hamilton E. Davis, the former managing editor of the Burlington Free Press, is a model of balance. "A clear fault line runs down the center of Howard Dean's stewardship of Vermont's environment," Davis writes. "On one side is his strong support for the purchase of wild land that might otherwise be subject to development; during his 11 years as governor, the state bought more than 470,000 acres of such land. . . .

"On the other side of the fault, however, is Dean's record on the regulation of retail and industrial development. His critics charge that his preference for the interests of large business over environmental protection sapped the vitality from the state's regulatory apparatus, especially Act 250, Vermont's historic development-control law, and from regulations pertaining to storm water runoff and water pollution."

Even more intriguing than the analysis of his record in vital policy areas are the insights into his governing style. Davis's take begins with the observation: "Say this about Howard Dean; he is his own man.

I record this not as an argument against or for Governor Dean, but only as a reminder. No matter which Democrat is elected in November -- a Howard Dean or a Joe Lieberman -- we can never let down our guard and assume that our policy goals are his policy goals -- no matter what their current platform says. We will need to keep organizing from the outside and convincing from the inside. There are many who believe that the Clinton administration would gladly have let the ergonomics standard drift on into bureacratic oblivion if labor and friends in Congress hadn't kept the pressure on.

Bottom line: Democrat or Republican, Dean or Lieberman -- there are no free lunches...or ergonomics standards.

Bush Tax System: Who Benefits; Who Pays?

Harold Meyerson argues that Bush's tax policies are (surprise) good for rich investors, but bad for those who actually work for a living

Bush tax policy rewards investment and inheritance. Relying on work for your income, by contrast, turns you into a second-class citizen.

In his first round of tax cuts in 2001, Bush got Congress to phase out the estate tax by 2010. Last year, with Republicans in control on Capitol Hill, he reduced the top tax rate on dividends from 39.6 percent to 15 percent, and brought the capital gains tax rate down from 20 percent to 15 percent as well.

This year, his new budget proposes that families be allowed to shield as much as $30,000 yearly on their investment income, which will abolish all remaining taxes on such income. Meanwhile, the income tax cuts to most middle-class families don't exceed a couple of hundred dollars, and payroll taxes for employees remain untouched.

And to the extent Bush's policies promote job growth, those jobs aren't growing in the U.S.

To say that reality is lagging behind the theory of investment-led growth, then, is to understate. The problem is that to invest today in stocks or mutual funds doesn't mean you're investing in job creation in the United States.

Outsourcing has turned the phrase "investment-led growth" into the grimmest of oxymorons. It means that Bush's tax policy subsidizes job growth in India and China rather than the United States. And in failing to create more employment here at home, the tax cuts have also helped depress wages. Real wages in the United States actually fell 0.7 percent in the fourth quarter of last year.

Why Go To All The Trouble?

This from today's Washington Post:

The rancher who chairs the House committee for environmental policy says he's finished trying to recast the Endangered Species Act in one fell swoop.

Rep. Richard W. Pombo (R-Calif.) says now he wants to take it on bit by bit.

"I think it's just a lot easier and a lot more practical to break it down," said Pombo, chairman of the House Resources Committee.

Why go to all the trouble? Just sit back and watch it happen.

Deep Doo Doo: Feces is Feces

Molly Ivins has a way of getting right to the heart of things:

While we understand that the Bushies believe it is the function of the courts to do whatever Republican presidents wish (they don't want conservatives on the bench, they want obedience from the bench), it was refreshing to see the several appeals courts insisting on, ahem, the law. Turns out an appeals court also finds weakening the Clean Air Act by executive order is not constitutionally kosher. Hope that's not too controversial for our friends in the "original intent" camp: The president of the United States cannot go about unilaterally changing the law. Egad, what will they think of next?

Weakening the Clean Air Act was Bush's ugly little payoff to the utilities industry at the expense of public health. Speaking of which, is anyone actually surprised to find mad cow disease among us? I was amused to hear a television pundit conclude that mad cow is "not a political issue." What he meant was, "not a partisan issue," in that R's and D's can be found on both sides of the efforts to prevent this very thing from happening. I assure you, this is profoundly political. Mad cow disease is exactly about how our political system is corrupted by special interest money. It is also a perfect example of how greed leads directly to bone-headed stupidity.