Document jy4wxMLG22yrMBmmJ1LpwmvM9

FILE NAME: Keene (KNE) DATE: 0000 DOC#: KNE011 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Article from Legal Newsletter - District Court Upholds Decision Against Insulation Manufacturers CURRENT REPORT ' tki.'U\LW' insure tha: materials purchased do not pose an unreasonab;e hazard to worker health. The purchasing agent sliould require that all chemical shipments be accom panied by a material safety date sheet, Port said. Other jobs the industrial hygienists must do include; (11 Know what processes materials are going through. Clark pledged that the OSHA program would con tin u" unu! every worker could feel safe on the jolt. Litigation TTSi-732033 . C ) Inventors the conti cl measures used in` the plant \ DISTRICT COURT UPHOLDS DECISION (ventilation, protective clothing, etc.), and insure that ^ '^ G A I N S T INSULATION lEAfTiipi; pc thc> arc adequate and performing up to specifications. (?) Check emergency controls to insure that if primary systems fail, some backup is provides to protect workers Exposures t o health hazards shoulo b. well doc- merited to: tw e Teasons, Port said. First, documentation *'25 show compliance with federal or state standards. Second. Tecords o f low exposure may persuade an in surance carrier to lower workers' compensation rates, he said. ----------------A label by the manufacturer on packages o f ashes'os insulation material ir forming the user that the priduc: "may be hazardous'' is no: sufficient warning o | the pavitv o f the dangers associated with asbestos to an insulation worker using the product, the LAS Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruied. The ruling, issued on May 1?, upheld a judgment for the plaintiff entered in the L',5. District Court fo: the Eastern District of Texas in Clcrer\<r B o 'd r. Fibrcbozrd Federal Agencies feper Product* Corporator, e: t (N'c. 72-1492). The suit was brought by the insulation worker against ASSISTANT LAEOP. SECRETARY REPORTS FEDERAL JOB SAFETY-HEALTH EFFORTS six manufacturers of insulation materials containing asbestos fo: injuries caused by failure of the firms tc warn of dangers involved ir. handling asbestos. Tnree of ANAHEIM. CALIF. -- (By ai: OSHR staff corres the firms issued no warnings with the:? products, and the pondent) - Tc upgrade the Federal Government safety other three issued " cautions" to alert contractor- program, the Occupational Safety and Health Administra purchasers of the products. tion must correct weaknesses, be firm about objectives, The defendant firms argued that the plaintiff had end revise guidelines, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Administration and Management. Fred G. Ciark. told the Western Safety Congress or. May 21. known for years that inhaling the asbestos dust W2 $ harmful to his health, and that ir. fact the jury ir, the original trial had found the plaintiff guilty of contribu Ir. his keynote address tr the Congress' Regional Federal Safety ar.c Health Conference, Clark outlined some of the OSHA efforts now being made tc insure that fccera wcrkpLces are safe and healthful. tory negligence because of this knowledge. The cour. noted that the three warnings were placed or. the products only a few yea::- before the plaintiffs suit. The warning labels, the court stated, constituted Peritcps the most significant effort being made is the development of a new executive order to implement more full; the provisions c f section H- c-f tine Occupational Safety and Health Act. Qari. outlined some of the provision' cf the proposed orde: (Current Report. January 31. p. 210;), noting specifically that the role of Field Federal Safety Councils will be speiied out in detail. In addition, the criteria for federal agency safety pro gram; v u i be Trvised and expanded, he said, in an attem pt io insure that the safety and health pregram wili be an important part of each agency's operation. Field Feoeral Safety Ccur.c::: v.-li s e n t a the focal point? for safety and health problems that arise at agency only diluted "cautions" which did no: suggest the gravity o f the risk o f exposure, the danger of asbestos:', mesothelioma, or ether cancers. The label? stated ir essence tha- breathing asber.es ir. excesir-t qucr.t.tie; could be harmful, that the dust produced by the products should no: be inhaled, ar.c that respirators should be used where adequate ventilation control was no: available. It was shown that the warnings were issued for the contractor-purchasers of the products and that the manu facturers neve: conducted tests tc determine the extent c>f the d2nge: from usage. Although there was evidence tc show that the plaintiff was await of possible harmful effects of the aus: and tha; field efts.:. Clark said. Also, under the proposed new executive order, the field councils will be reconstituted ic include representation from agency employee: as well ti the agencies themselves. . he failed to wear a respirator (which was no: required- or, the job), the court held tha: contributory negligence ir. strict liabiitry cases is no: a defense "when such negl.ger.ee consists merely in a failure to discover the defect in As the leade; ir. federal job safety and health efforts, the product, oi tc guard against the possibility of us OSHA and the Department c f Labor should be models c f existence.' Only' contributory negligence " which consists effective safety programming. D ark said. This hat not ir. voluntarily ar.d unreasonably proceeding to encounter a been the east in the past, but now Labor Secretary Peter known danger, and commonly passes under the name of Biennar. has charged Clark with responsibility for develop assumption o f risk" is a defense ir. a strict liability suit, ing a comprehensive departmental safety a rc health pro the court held. . " ject:. that can serve a a model for other agencies. One of Tr.: firr. product* of th e prograrr was p u tu cato n o ' a K-pag; saisty bookie: distributed to drpar.mrn; em ployer*. h: said A rehabcitenor prograrr tc* problem c:i:.i:-:r.- ar.d c-.:; users al.-o i: planned. In a. .lrrurg the verdict o f the district court, the cour: conciliat'd that there was r.;- compelling evidence that reasonable persons would hsvt conceded that the plaini :t' was aware of Ine risk: but nevertheless continued to encounter tiicr. C c r '` p t * Z t- Thft E j ' e L i c 1 N ot.c^c AriS'-t, r.r.