Document 2qXpvO38n8yJkvrRzxyGR7XMr

T. Manner Page 249 1 agree with Union Carbide? ' 2 ; A. . Not entirely,-no; It depends on 3 the particular.dlspute-you'fe. thin king about. 4 Q. ' This particular dispute. .r' . 5 A. ;.`/I think that they had>reason to-< > . 6 fear a.predictable tightening up of OSHA. I 7 think they had-reason to fear that it.would 8 happen qukkly enough^'that it would make it 9 very difficult for them to continue in business 10 in asbestos- Tbatthayhada picture.of the 11 world where it was going to be possible for a 12 long period:of time to produceasbestos 13 relatively safely, but the concern about the . 14 downsidej partly onthebasisof other people's- . 15 behavior;was goingto m a ke .lt.im possible for 16 them, so they were very unhappy with the - 17 prospects of what they-took to be?the course of 18 regulatory tightening up;;. .-.< 19 Q.i i. i Let's take this battle over OSH A. 20 In your life l<rtig:study of these type battles, . 21 do you take a position on one side or the; J.. 22 other?. What-side are you on. in an issue like 23 this.?-:: : ;fj'k . ' .1. 24 MSi ROSENBERG: Objection as to ; " . 25 -jiuj..'jf0rn>i.t!Position as;to.what?- o j Page 251 1 Q. Let me ask you a different 2 question. When did this debate over OSHA go 3 on? 4 A. It went on from 1964/5 beginning, 5 all the way through 1969 in one phase and then 6 heated up again in 1970 with the legislation 7 and then-heated'Up again--as they started 8 setting the rules for OSH A, the exposure levels . 9 and the standard -- immediate standard.and long 10 term standard. I was talking about the longer 11 term standard, one of threshold value levels. 12 Q. At that lime you were aware of 13 these issues? Thinking back, this is nothing 14 you discoverediin -your research.- You knew what 15 was:going-on at the time being a student of ' 16 political science.: 17 A. Yes,iTwai.:in-Washington.in-19.96 18 as well as workingHEW as an-assistant-to'.the 19 cabinet secretary and this would have come up;-. 20 as an issue. Not that he. was involved .in every 21 aspect of it, but because, M edicare, which is! ; 22 what I was working-on, was-so involved, in-this 23 labor management dispute,T beard the same24 things about this dispute. 25 Q. At-that time, not looking back.in ) Page 250; 1 ...iQ.i r>Eta-you understand;my question? 2 A. NO; 3 Q. As to the .competing interest of1 4 protecting -- the advocacy groups for: 5 protection-off the-.worker and.use your word, . . 6 firms whose, I think you used the term, prime 7 motivation,is economic ",, 8 A. EconOmJc.surVi.VaL .. 9 ; l yiMSi.RQSENBERG: Doyou.understand: 10 thcquestion? , i. 11 A. I understand it now:: My answer... 12 is straightforward: ni-s...- lv 13 `i nI/m.'not afall;surprised that ... o: 14 firms are concerned about-surviving. .I'm not -. 15 at all surprised that advocates of workers 16 safety are-concerned'about improving safety 17 levels and.I.think you see that in the 18 balancing act that took place about threshold 19 value levels. That is, a tightening up-but a - 20 postponement of if for two years, that is the: 21 sort of thing: that I; would have expected. 22 I. thought, there was a balancing . . 23 act between .the interest at hand and-both those ' 24 interests are important. Econoinic continuation 25 is important to labor too: Page 252 I retrospect as a politicaLscientist,. but at< 2 that time,- what was your.position?-. . .r - *-? 3 A.; I was sympathetic to the-cohcerns-V 4 about worker safety, but not sure that the :-A 5 means that were put forward -- I didn't have an 6 independent view about wbat would be tolerable 7 and appropriate means, but.that there was a 8 problem I was.sure; 9 Q.. - Being a student off public policy:. 10 and being in W-ashington-at the time.when the1.-- 11 regulations were enacted, didy.ou feel at the 12 time that they were reasonable regulations? 13 A. Yes. I think they represented a 14 somewhat better outcome for organized labor 15 than it did for the industry; but there were 16 concessions on the side of the industry too and 17 I thought that balancing act was Important so 18 as not to have a turnaround against OSHA 19 shortly thereafter with a change in government. 20 Q. You brought up, I think you 21 called it a trade organization, and we agreed 22 that we were talking about the Asbestos 23 Information Association? 24 A. Right. 25 Q. The AIA? ' POHLMAN REPORTING COMPANY (314)421-0099 63 (Pages 249 to 252)