Document qRN4d3Qvd8eJ3JNEOODr1brM

mm > - '- . W . ` J(i't *'* ' re&ruary 1936 . ! OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES Additional Responsibility Legislation Places On Industry By HENRY D. SAYER A<XI\T10N OF CASUALTY" A VO SURETY EXECUTIVES. MOV YORC. S X OT many years ago legislators and industrialists re doubcedly, anocher year will see legislative attempts in many Nsponded to the new doctrine of compensation for indus more staces. In great part these efforts were noc suClcsshiI, trial accidents svithouc regard to fault as a causative buc a renewal of them is inevitable. , factor. So familiar has this compensation principle becoEmme ployers will have to prepare to meet chc added burden of that it is virtually unanimously accepted by employers, and such laws". Just as in time the cost of compensation for acci this idea that was so revolutionary only a short twenty years dents was absorbed, so coo will the cost of compensation for *go is now an accepted rule of industry. Its burdens have not diseases in time be absorbed if right principles prevail and if been lessened as time has passed. On die contrary, compensa che etlbrc is nor made under rhe guise of compensation ro charge tion costs have steadily mounted. But industry long since employers with general health and life insurance of their learned to absorb those costs and to assume those burdens, even workers though frequently at the cost of great liardship. Buc it is not certain that correct principles will always be Entirely aside from the monetary bcnctits to injured workers observed. The temptacion is great to give co the oppressed u>d the dependents of deceased employees, the two gteac out aiid distressed--out of the ocher man's funds! To be the public standing benefts to workers through the compensation system almoner of industry's money must be a comforting thoughc to are Cl) the reduction of accidcnc frequency brought about by some public officials--especially at election time. the promulgation of safety standards and by good engineering, and (2) the reduction of accident severity, by the requirement NCCLSSAKY" TO SAFHOUARD AGAINST ACCRUED LIABILITY" for prompt medical and surgical care at the expense of the We must, therefore, be vigilantly on guard co demand in all employer. These are the positive sides of compensation for such legislative efforts a recognition of sound principles and accidents, and employers may well take pride in the accom policies, and insist that such laws do not throttle che industry plishments of industry', ol medicine, and of engineering in icself. It is essential thac we insist on at least two safeguards: these lines. (1) To guard against the already accrued liability, and (2) to RECENT LEGISLATION" ON" OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES WIDESPREAD make certain that compensation shall be payable onlv for diseases chat are truly occupational. Just as twenty years ago there was chc insistent demand for What is meant by the term accrued liability is illustrated compensation for accidental injuries, so now there is an ever by wliac lias recently hap|Ycued in New York. The New York growing demand for legislation for compensation for industrial state law is what is known as a schedule law, thac is, the law diseases. This is no new thing to us here in New York. Wc itself contains a list of diseases or poisonings wich a parallel have had an occupational-disease statute since 1920. Three or column listing che occupations or processes in which such con four other states have rather full occupational-disease laws, ditions usually occur. Thus, co use a common illustration, lead while some others have laws of somewhat limited application poisoning is listed as a disease, and is compensable when in But in the greater number of stares, no provisions have been curred by a worker engaged in any work chat causes him co use ldopecd for compensation for occupational diseases. or be exposed co lead. This, it will readily be seen, is truly an The essence of the idea "of compensation for occupational occupational disease, readily recognizable as such, and is a diseases is thac disability or deach from a-truly occupational definite pathological encicv. Seldom is the disease found ex- disease is just as much the responsibility of industry as is such cepc among lead workers, painters, and rhe like. a condition resulting from industrial accidcnc. - The schedule in the New York act had been enlarged from With chis principle it is hard to disagree. Few chcre arc jvho time to time until it included practically all known occupa will say that the workman who su/Fcrs a disability, who is de tional diseases with che exception of lung diseases attributable prived of the means of a livelihood through a disease or sick co dust. Ic is generally conceded char these Just diseases call ness that caane upon him only because of his exposure in his for special provisions of law and for diifcrcnr procedures work to chc deleterious effects of some poison or some chemical, The efTort to provide such special provisions proved abor some dusts, gases, or fumes, is noc equally encicled to compensa tive, and when the legislature passed a general all-inclusive tion with his brother whose disability came or. him bv reason provision to cover in broad cerms "anv and all occupational of an accident. In principle borh seem alike. diseases," it swept in under the law all dust diseases alone So prevalent is chis idea thac in the legislatures of 13 scares with the rest. bills were introduced last winter newly providing for occupa tional diseases or for enlarging the existing laws. In a number Sosic occupational diseascs are of slow development of states provision was made for the appointment of interim Now by the very nature of these diseases they arc of slow, legislative committees to study and report on the subject: of progressive development. Silicosis, or a fibrous condition of occupational-disease legislation at the next sessions. Un- the lungs resulting from the inhalation of silica dust, requires Contribuccd by the Safety Committee and presented at a session on Occupational Diseases at the Annual Meeting, New York, N. Y . Dec. 1-6, 1935, of The Avsiicw Society or Mechanical Enoinrrrs. Slightly abridged. a minimum of five years of exposure to produce disability, and many authorities assert that che progression co disability takes from ren co fifteen years In all chesc diseases, there comes a time when regular work is not possible This is called in the 103 i l-.M Muck \s:cal Hvginuhrixo Jtfjr cnic:i The !-MBc.'t the Atce-'pen , iw v.c-i 'in Tncre :s r-other. i-J if engineers i vers important, the statute bonxs. ,t trejeed a liability for many- years .it expo sider.ition in favor of the schedule method of covering 'VAup.isure tlur had already taken plate amor-tf thousands oj workers non.il diseises, rather than the general all-inclusi\e method, industry- found itscit u,cd with die problem ol paving for Con and :bat is pres muon Prevention is the key to the -jeeupu ditions chat arose <c a time when the law imposed no special duty on the employer to pay for the condition or to take effect r.e meisurcs to prcienr the disease While mJustrv c.nnot issunie <,tlcl<- such a burden, neither can insurance be askcJ to take K on. Payment lor losses that accrued prior to the insurance contract is noc m any sense in surance. insurance n the assumption of liability *"or a contin gency or for a fortuitous future happening The result of the new law in Mew Y'ork has been disastrous tiontl-dtsease situation. Just . the engineers rook up the challenge in the field uf industrial safety when .iccidcnc-compcnsaciun laws came into operation, and have done a magnifi cent fob. so they will have to take over an intensive studs- o( the means and methods of prevention of disease. Thcs have learned that good result? are obtained onlv when thcs can concentrate on some special problem or on some phase of a problem How- better can the engineer concentrate on occupational- Premium rates were scr at profubffive figures Where dust disease prevention than to scare Out ss ith a named list of diseases exposures existed supplementary rates tvere added to the regu set forth in the IasvJ It is ofren necessary to appeal to employers lar already hieh compensation races. These supplemental rates or management to take certain steps in rhrosving up safeguards, ranecd from the lowest at something more than a dollar per hundred dollars of payroll up ro as high is twelve and thirceen dollars a hundred The total compensation cost, therefore, for many industries has risen to more than twenty dollars. When this is compared to the comparatively low compensation cost in states where such liabilities have nor been imposed on industry, it will be readily appreciated how difficult it Is for and these cost money, tf the engineer is dealing svith a definite schedule of diseases he looks for the conditions in a plant from which those diseases may arise He can tell management that it lead is used workers must be safeguarded from it. That is ele mentary But wtthout the law suggesting it. how many would chink to guard against chrome ulceracion, or adequately safeguard workers coming in contact svich or using methi I Mew York industries to survive under competition. Since September 1, I9\5, die effective date of the new law, many plants have utterly closed down, some have gone on part tune, chloride, or any of the other many conditions included in the occupational-disease schedule? others are contracting out to plants in other states that part of SAFEGUARD AO.MNST EVERYTHING ' their operac/ons which are involved in dust, and with it all. the worker may lie said to he the sufferer rhnmgh unemployment Any attempt anywhere to impose on employers by taw a burden of responsibility for diseises of past contraction will lead inevitably to such a muddled situation as exists in Mew Vork today. (c may be suggested: Safeguard against everything. How ever, no nutter whac attempts are made, no matter hmv willing the employer to go along yvith the plans, under any blanket plan some dangerous conditions will cercainlv be overlooked And from the standpoint of bringing to the employer the necessity of spending money in disease prevention, it is hard COMPENSATION SHOULD IIE CONFINED TO TRULY OCCUPATIONAL niscAsts The second principle is that compensation shall be provided only for diseases truly occupational. The term "occupariniui disease" is in common use, yet it has no fixed definition nor definite limitations The effort is sometimes made to define ic as a "disease that arises out of and in the course of employ ment." Such a definition is thoroughly unsatisfactory. This terminology has been used probably because it has ample precedent in the field of accident compensation, but the condi tions surrounding accidents and those surrounding disease are so radically different that the same terms will not dp Shall we say that heart disease, tuberculosis, pneumonia, pleurisy, head colds, and all the multitude of human ills shall be deemed occupational when they occur among workers and it is claimed chat some act or incident of the employment caused or contributed to the disease5 if so. ic means nothine less than general health and lilc insurance for workers at the employer's expense. This u not a burden that industry should or could bear. An occupational disease is not a. disease of ordinary life, buc a disease "characteristic of and peculiar to" the occupation. When speaking of disease, these words arc far morcdcfinitc than is the phrase "arising out and m the course of" employment They should be used wherever ic is impossible co have a schedule or listing of diseases . This qualification has received the approval of the State In dustrial Board in Mew York. As sec there has not been suffi cient time for a case to arise under it and be passed on by the courts, buc ic is grcaclv to be hoped that the courts will follow this view of occsipuior.il diseases. going ro convince him iliac he has a disease hazard warranting the expenditure of large sums unless the law gives the clue to the diseases to be guarded against. Only by the slow laborious process of picking up diseases as they occur and are made com pensable over a period probahly of years yy'ill yve get effective prevention rvork, unless the scientific knowledge of diseases and industrial processes now possessed hv public authorities in die field of industrial hygiene is made available to industry chrough writing ic into the statute. Tltat new burdens are being imposed on employers by recent legislation or are impending in the demand for new legislation must be recognized. There rvill be no turning back in this field, any more chan chere will be turning back in the field of compensation for accidents. If, however, we are wise, we will give heed co che lessons we have learned out of an abondaac experience in accident compensation. The same motivating factors svill be present in this ness- field; the same liberality, rhe same generosity with the employer's moneys. The cure for all the yvtirkers' ills will be attempted through these layvs. Vagueness and lack of definition but play into the hands of the overltbcral. We should insistently demand that occupational-disease legislation be intelligent, certain in terms, and properly safe guarded against already incurred liabilities. Let che em ployer's responsibility be expressed in understandable terms and with a scrupulous regard for the ability of industry to carry the increased load. And above all insist that the lavr be so yvorded as to make effective prevention work possible. By so doing, and only by so doing, will industrial justice be done and effective steps taken to earn- industry's part in che field of the true occupational disease t!