Document Oz3QY6mqmVL5YwwJ0ZBjKoqQK

FILE NAME: Avondale (AVD) DATE: 1965 Oct 1 DOC#: AVD168 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Memo to Shipyard Delegates with Attached Paper - Compensation and the Occupational Diseases Shipbuilders 1730 K Street N . W . Council FEDERAL 8-7722 of America W a s h in g t o n 6, D. C O ctober 1, 1965 00137 TO: SHIPYARD DELEGATES G entlem en: S u b jec ^* C o m p e n s a tio n and th e O c c u p a tio n a l D is e a s e a . At a recen t m eeting of.the C ouncil's Safety C om m ittee, the attached papers w ere review ed. The m ain thrust of the p r e se n tation is that State W orkm en's C om pensation and F ed era l M edi ca re co n flict and the tim e has now a rriv ed for a d ecisio n , with regard to occupational d is e a s e s , on w hether W orkm en's C om p en sa tio n should be abondoned in fa v o r of M ed icare co v er a g e. T he C om m ittee agreed that the situ ation should be r e fe r r e d to the shipyard M em bers of the C ouncil for their ad vice. a* P le a se review the p rop osal and subm it your v iew s to the C ouncil prom ptly so that an ea rly d ecisio n can be reached. E nclosures j vrfV*> r V-4i.5ir A u g0u s t 9, 19^5 COM PENSATION AND THE OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE A D D E N D U M TO P A P E R D A T E D 8 / 2 6 / 0 4 ________ A pproxim ately one year has elap sed sin ce the subject paper was p r e pared and during this tim e th ere has been w id e-3 p rea d publicity given the su b ject in n ew sp ap ers, m a g a zin es and other m ed ia. Union m em b ersh ip groups a re being a d d ressed in m any a rea s of the Country by attorneys for the purpose of lettin g em p loyees know th eir rights under the W orkm en's C om p en sation L aw s to m ake c la im s ag a in st em p lo y er s for such health im p a irm en ts as h earin g, occu p ation al b ro n ch itis, im p airm en t of v ision due to rep eated rem oval of fo reig n b o d ies, heart a ilm en ts, hand trem o rs through the continued u se of a ir to o ls, and the lik e . W hile it is s till w ise for in d u s try to be d isc r e e t in its d isc u ssio n of th is su bject, to avoid encouragem ent of open debate w ith opposing fo r c e s, b e lie v e the tim e has com e when it should start taking definite step s tow ard defending its e lf. Follow ing are som e suggested argum ents that might be used by in dustry in attempting to have the occupational d isease feature removed from our W orkm en's C om pensation Laws and handled as a separate coverage. 1. A w ards for occupational d is e a s e s are bound to conflict w ith benefits received by our older citizen s under M edicare; m ost awards for health d eficien cie s are, of cou rse, m ade in the m ajority of instances to em p l o y e e s p r e t t y w e l l up in a g e . __ 2. The shipyard industry acknow ledges resp on sib ility for very f e w O. D. c l a i m s b e c a u s e o i t s h ir in g p r a c t i c e s , a s s e t out in the a tta c h e d m em orandum . Because of this fact, em ployees are given awards purely through the so cia listic and w elfare tendencies of the courts or other bodies before which these claim ants appear. . 3. B e c a u se of th e s e unstable grounds upon w hich aw ards are p resen tly m ade, it is b elieved the unions, feelin g that the wind might not alw ays blow in this sam e direction, would be receptive to a m ore stable m eans of having their w orn-out m em b ers cared for. 4. T h ere appear to be two a lter n a tiv es to the p resen t effort of h andling th e p r o b le m , i . e . , p r iv a te in d u s tr ia l h ealth in s u r a n c e c a r r ie d by the em ployees, or an am endm ent to the M edicare bill. The M edicare amend m ent would certainly se e m to be the m o re lo g ica l of the two since the claim of w o r k m e n in the a g e group of p erh a p s 50 y e a r s on up a re the pure r e s u lt of long y ea rs of p h ysical labor which should not, and really connot, be charged to a com pany, corp oration or industry. 5. N e e d l e s s to' say, if the sh ip y a rd in d u stry we ce to be hit vjith the full im pact of all possible awards under its W orkmen's com pensation c o v erage for em ployees who endure deficien cies failing within occupational d is e a s e group, it would be a financial burden which very ivw. if any. corpor ations could m eet. # ## August 26, 1964 C O N F ID E N T IA L COM PENSATION AND THE OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE It a p p e a r s tha.t th e t im e h a s c o m e fo r th e s h ip y a r d in d u str y to ta k e inventory of its p osition and vu ln erab ility w ith regard to the health fa cto rs of its em p loyees and the relation of th ese fa cto rs to so -c a lle d occupational d is e a s e s for w hich em p lo y ers a re so often unfairly held to be resp o n sib le. The in tegrated sh ip yard s have taken great strid es forw ard during the la st d ecad e in the p rotection of em p lo y ees fro m physical in ju ries, th is m ade p o ssib le by im provem ent of p erso n a l p rotective equipm ent, sounder safety p rogram s, im proved production p ra ctic es, and the lik e. The co m p ellin g factor in th is im p rovem en t, a sid e from the b a sic one of h u m ane n e s s , is the ev er-m o u n tin g co st of com p en sation and m ed ical c la im s w hich threaten the v ery com p etitiv en ess of a yard. Now, as far as actu al p h y sica l in ju ries to life and lim b are co n cerned, industry is facin g a known a d v ersa ry and can help p rotect its eco n om ic sou nd n ess with sound safety p ro g ra m s, c lo se lia iso n w ith its u n der w riter s on com pensation co n tro ls, etc. H ow ever, when w e approach the ' su b ject of em p lo y ee health, w e en ter an a rea that is p retty m uch beyond em ployer control. True, con sid erab le attention is given resp iratory p ro tectiv e equipm ent, ven tilation , ate. , but when an em p lo y ee's gen eral health is co n sid ered the em p lo y er's p rob lem and r e sp o n sib ility under co m p en sa tion la w s, the la tter had b etter p lace th is p rob lem in the proper p e r s p e c tive and attem pt to do som ething about it before it b ecom es a m on ster. W hile com pensation law p ra ctice alw ays included s o -c a lle d occu p ation al' d ise a se s, p resen t-d ay ideology can very w ell expand th is subject far b e yond the bounds of reason and accep tan ce. When an em p loyee is origin ally h ired, and lik ew ise w hen an e m ployee rep orts for w ork on each shift, his gen eral o v era ll p h ysical con d ition is quite obvious, w ith the p o ssib le excep tion of h is back or other m u scu lar sy ste m s. So, he is turned lo o se on the job, and if he is su b jected to any p h ysical dam age such as cuts, b ru ises, fra ctu res, burns, etc. , he is treated for sam e and com pensated for the tim e lo st as the r e sult th ereo f. And, truthfully, w here he has brought an o ff-th e-jo b injury to w ork w ith him that day and has su c c e s s fu lly , though felo n io u sly , hidden it fro m h is su p erior, he can and d oes have it rep aired under h is em p lo y er's coverage- The em p loyer is ta citly quite aw are of th ese in sta n ces, e sp e c ia lly w ith the m any infam ous back c a s e s w ith w hich he is ch arged . H ow ever, when our industry co n sid ers d efen se against or em ployee protection against occupational d is e a s e s , we have a frightening spectrum facing us. As a m atter of fact, we m ust ex p ress our concern cautiously le s t scar" a r a ih of c la im s that can bury u s. W hile the w hole subject is in tis e lf baffling, the re a l p u zzler is the i fact that w ere em p lo y ers to hum anely and p ra isew o rth ily m ake a..m ore p o s- ! itiv e m ove to guard and im p ro v e the w e llb e in g of theijr e m p lo y e e s, such as : p rop osed , for exam p le, by the D irecto r of the B ureau of Labor Standards ; in le tte r of A p ril 22, 1964, a d d ressed to Mr. Edwin M. Hood, P resid en t of the Shipbuilders C ouncil of A m erica , they would, under p resen t law s - i and court philosophy, be p rogram m in g th eir own doom . Suppose, for in - : stan ce, a shipyard em p loyer, for h is own p rotection and in a vital d e te r m in a tio n to safegu ard h is em p lo y ee s fr o m injury and h a za rd s, d ecid ed to i h ire only th ose new em p lo y ees who could p a ss a rigid health exam ination, ; and fu rth er required the exam ination of each of the em p loyees on his cu r- ! rent p a y ro ll tow ard the end of elim in atin g a ll but th ose who w ere p h y sica lly J fit. We b eliev e the follow in g would resu lt: j (1) The unions would not allow elim in a tio n of any regular em ploy e e s who fa iled to m eet the standards. (2) T h o se on the p a y ro ll w ho fa iled to m eet th e stand ard s would sue im m ed iately for com pensation aw ards, claim ing their d eficien cies w ere tbe resu lt of w orking conditions - and w in. (3) T he num ber of new h ir e s who p a sse d the p h y sic a l standards would be so low as to m ake it im p o ssib le to fill m anning req u irem en ts. T h erefo re, it m u st be concluded that if pur in d u stry is going to co n tinue to do the m axim um to p rotect its em p lo y ees, the staggerin g potential burden of aw ards for occupational d ise a se s m ust be elim inated from our com pensation law 3, or the law s rew ritten to protect the em ployer from "buying" health d e fic ie n c ie s ca u sed ou tsid e of em ploym ent. The answ er would seem to be p rivate p rocu rem ent of in d u strial health in su ran ce by the- em p loyee. No doubt negotiation of labor agreem en ts would u ltim ately throw at le a st part of the health in su ran ce p rem iu m s to the em p loyer, but the final ju d gm en t a s to w hether or not th is w ould ev er be a ccep ta b le w ould be b ased upon the type c o v e r a g e in v o lv e d . N ow that M ed ica re is- a fact rath er than a d rea m , perhaps we could p riv a tely p rev a il upon so m e w ild lib e r a l to sponsor an am en d m en t to co v er our n eed s. i! If th is p rop osal rings of brutality, h esita te briefly b efo re m aking I the accu sation and ask yo u rself w hether the need for such proposal is not actually based on ex trem ist m oves on the part of our courts, law m akers, and the like, to m ake the shipyard em ployer totally responsible for the health of his em ployee when he really con trols in a minute way only eight hours of the m an 's tw enty-four hour day and only five days of the m an 's sev e n -d a y w eek, o r 2, 080 hours out of a total 8, 760 hours per y ea r. D u r ing this sm a ll portion of the e m p lo y e e 's life, h is exp osu re to health c o n ta in m e n t s . in an in d u str y such a s o u r s , is e x t r e m e l y s m a l l and. at that. iW U,- r v . t M C : c o : a r c o n t r i v e d P s s i oil out sta ncir.* a r -l gum ent a g a in s r health r e s p o n s ib ilit y the tact that b e ca u se ot the " least if or f a m i n e " n a tu r e of ou r b u s i n e s s a m a j o r it y of our e m p l o y e e s do not w o rk ii . .. . *, Page Three stea d ily at any one shipyard. And being in terim , or d ay-b y-d ay, em p lo y e e s , the shipyard has no know ledge of the contam ination exp osu re of its em p loyees during days or p eriod s when they a r e w orking elsew h ere. What industry is actu ally saying then is that if it is furnished w ith 1 co m p letely healthy em p lo y ees w hose o ff-th e-jo b a c tiv itie s, including d iet, - ` are beyond rep roach, and if such em p lo y ees w ill w ear a ll p rescrib ed p r o tectiv e equipm ent, even when the su p erv iso r is not ob servin g, and if such j em p lo y ee s w ill subm it to reg u la r re-ex a m in a tio n s to m ake certain no d ia - ' e a se has been contracted p riv a tely or during em ploym ent elsew h ere that j m igh t be aggravated by th eir reg u la r w ork, in d u stry m igh t then, and on ly j then, con sid er the burden of occupational d is e a s e s to be fa ir and r e a so n - : ab le when properly adjudicated by the cou rts. , * ?i In su m m a r y , can n ot w e in in d u str y , w ho a r e a lr e a d y sh o u ld e rin g a ; trem en d ou s burden in th is c o st of com p en sation for p h y sica l d am ages to , e m p lo y e e s, do som ething to p reven t utter ruin in the form of health im - j pairm ent resp on sib ility. T his is , at p resen t, a sm oldering m enace w hich m ay and probably w ill at any tim e break out into a h olocau st. 1j # # # : ii f i fi