Document zdXdVNJzMyL27gYG3oqDgbxZn

FILE NAME: Asbestos Sacks and Bags (ASB) DATE: 1985 Apr DOC#: ASB049 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Journal Article - Dockworkers Land AsbestosRelated Diseases C om pensation ^ m s n a m Dockworkers land asb estosrelated d isea ses Researcher Martin Stow er relates how dockworkers were kept in ignorance for many years about asbestos-related diseases which could be caused by unloading asbestos cargoes. His work for the Society for the Prevention of Asbestosis and Industrial Diseases also revealed that barristers may give misleading advice to dockworkers seeking compensation from ports authorities. of oil-- linseed, palm oil or perhaps diesel fuel. On 25 May 1965, news reached men in South West India Docks that The Port of London Authority had raised the hourly rate on asbestos "by two bob an hour!"-- a 50 per cent increase. The Authority was going to provide masks to wear, and the two shillings were to make up for the inconve Doubts regarding the safety of asbestos airborne fibres is considered a sure sign that nience of wearing them! were raised at least as early as 1898, but it the invisible and dangerous respirable fibres Amid the euphoria, someone began to was not until 1965 that the hazardous are also present. raise awkward questions. A meeting was nature of asbestos became known to Before 1965, asbestos was usually pack held and they got the answers. dockworkers. When this happened, pressure ed in hessian sacks which allowed fibres to "You can get a disease of the lung from was brought to bear, and more adequate escape. Sometimes, paper sacks were used, asbestos. It is called asbestosis. The medics precautions were introduced with respect to but these were easily damaged in transit and have known about it for years. An Act was packaging and handling asbestos cargoes. during loading and unloading, with conse passed on it in 1931, Once contracted, you Previously, asbestos had been transported quent release of fibres. Asbestos has even have 15 to 25 years to live. You die slowly." in porous hessian sacks, as if it were no more been shipped loose, as ballast. Within a few months, asbestos cargoes dangerous than coffee beans. Because of its volume, an asbestos cargo were blacked by the whole of the dock work Asbestos-related illnesses (such as was stowed in every odd space available to force. They refused to handle it in its former, asbestosis, mesothelioma and lung cancer) maintain profits. Places considered imprac exposed state and demanded that it be usually develop years after the time of tical for more expensive goods were often packed in plastic bags to be placed in drums exposure; the effects of conditions before the used for asbestos. A favourite stowage was and strapped to fork-lift boards. mid-1960s are only now becoming ap 'ship's tank. Usually this carried some kind Conflict developed between the PLA, the parent Doctors attached to the port authorities must have observed the effects of asbestos 111 on dockers, and should certainly have recognised what they saw, since the symp toms of asbestosis were known in 1924. Asbestos was recognised as a cause of lung cancer in 1955 and the link between asbestos and mesothelioma (a cancer of the lung's lining) came to light in 1960. Ben Morris worked in the South West India ;9.45 a.m. Mobile arrives. "Mobile" is yelled Docks on the Isle of Dogs. He contracted . , out joy fully upon sighting the blue Port of pleural asbestosis in 1966. Ben's brother London Authority van which fetches tea described a typical day's work, unloading a - urns and sandwiches for the gangs working tank of asbestos. on the ships. We have now reached a depth The tank was fitted with a Water-tight of 10 feet in the tank, and because we are metal cover measuring about 9 feet x 9 feet, i close to therengine room, the temperature is V When the cover was removed entry was by hovering around 100F. This, coupled with False assumptions steel laddeiuvelded to one of the sides.'The> the work effort has caused most of us to strip compartment within would be about-18 feet down to the minimum beneath the boiler Dockers who have become ill through square and 50 to 70 feet deep. This would ;suits we have been issued with, exposure to asbestos and who now seek hold about 400 to 500 tons of asbestos. y r ~ The sun is shining, but there is a cool wind compensation face many obstacles. These include false assumptions about: the conditions under which dockers Pay for asbestos work was about 4 y blowing across the deck; so, because our shillings an hour in 1965 and was ,.con-ffe bodies are sweat-drenched, we decide to ; sidered poor, even before dockers learnt of consume "mobile" within the tank. The worked while handling asbestos cargoes and the resulting exposure to asbestos dust; and, the medical and scientific evidence avail able at the time which made the dangers of this exposure.very clear. the dangers involved. V . ganger lowers tea urns, mugs and sand Fourpairs - * - , wiches on a rope, and we settle back gratefully on the soft bags to rest while we "Eight of us work, split into four pairs, one eat and drink. Naturally, Ben and I work as pair to each comer ofthe tank. Another four fV a pair, arid sit together chatting over the Absence of legal precedent for this type of men go into the barge placed between the g meal. claim by a docker has been a major stumbling block, but the Society for the Prevention of Asbestosis and Industrial Diseases has had some success in obtaining payments for relatives. Before shipping to this country, asbestos is broken into light fluffy clumps of fibre. ship and the quayside and the ganger stays Facing him, I see a reflection of what I on deck to give signals to the final member y must look like. His sweat is impregnated of the gang, the crane driver. with asbestos fibres and is congealing on his 8.05 a.m. Ship's crew takes offtank-top. ' - / face. He has false-grey eyebrows, eyelashes 8.15 a.m. We begin to break down through rf andhair.^.^;> the top layers of bagwork, using snotters (a He blows the off-white dust offthe surface single rope with a loop at each end) about 15jiy o f his mug o f tea, before raising it to his lips Asbestos is naturally fibrous because of its feet lpng. They will hold an average 6 f 15xi8j|'w h ereof small triangular shaped crust is crystalline structure; it will readily break bags o f asbestos. At this point, there is nbyy forming in each comer. As he moves, the into smaller and smaller fibres. Because of need for the ganger to signal since the crane missing buttons allow a view o f his upper this fibrillar structure, the presence of visible driver has all ofus in view. . : bare chest showing a woolly texture o f fibres 36 Health & Safety at Work April 1985 Ellerman Line (responsible for the ships carrying asbestos) and the Transport and General Workers Union. An Occupational health circular was issued to dockers via pay packets, dated 27 September 1966 and signed by Dr A. M. Lawrence-Smith, Principal Medical Officer of the PLA Medical Department. This glibly reassuring document dismissed the sugges tion that asbestos cargoes held any dangers for those handling them. Questionable Among other questionable assertions, it was stated that mesothelioma "occurs only where crude asbestos is processed and a particular variety and grade of dust, not found in commercial cargo, is released into the air." This statement contradicted the crucial paper on the subject which had been published sue years previously by Dr J. C. Wagner and colleagues.1 Wagner's report implied that asbestos must be considered a potential mesothelioma carcinogen: (1) during and after mining processes; (2) during and after "cobbing" to free asbestos fibres from adhering rock; and, (3) during transport in hessian sacks-- the same sacks of asbestos handled by dockers when they arrived in British ports. By 1966, the work of Wagner et al had been widely publicised, and should have been known to the PLA Medical Depart ment, when Dr Lawrence-Smith wrote his circular. A report by the Employment Advisory Service, Mesothelioma Register 1967-68, mentions four dockers with "definite" mesothelioma and definite occupational exposure to asbestos. The cases may well have been known to the PLA Medical Department in 1966. Regarding asbestosis, Dr LawrenceSmith stated that: "No cases of this serious complaint have ever occurred in the Port of London Authority's service". It is odd that such cases started to occur, or at least to be recognised, as soon as the dockers them selves knew what they were dealing with. Felt severe pain On 28 May 1966, Ben Morris, who had worked for the PLA at South West India Docks and had often unloaded asbestos, felt a severe pain in the lower left side of his chest. A series of examinations were made by Dr Capel at the London Chest Hospital beginning on 15 June 1966. On 5 April 1967, Dr Capel was on vacation and Ben was examined by a junior doctor. Reading from the files, he told Ben that he had asbestosis. By 7 April 1967, the news had Morris, dockworker mixed with the curly hair. Behind him, a One could hardly imagine a copper coming single ray o f sunshine has penetrated the J :/ down here for a "pinch". * opening above us and stands out against the Most men have bloodshot eyes and some stark shadow of the background. Within it -' take the opportunity of swilling their mouths are captured a million dancing flakes, ^ out with a gulp of tea and spit out an evil spinning and weaving: shining specks of grey mixture. We are now ankle-deep in the asbestos dust. asbestos debris; it is harder to locate the 10.00 a.m. Resume unloading, ganger tells corners of sacks. us the ship is working till seven. Does 5.00 p.m. "Reliefs" clamber down the steel anyone want a relief at 5 pm? Two (from in ladder. The two men they are replacing have' tank) decide they do. already done. The crane is held up till they 12.00-1.00 p.m. Dinner break. reach the bottom, now 45 feet deep. They 2.00 p.m. We have now reached a depth of bring with them milk bottles full of hot tea about 25 feet Everyone is sprawled out on and coffee to share among the gang. This is bagwork, thankful for the enforced lull when much appreciated by everyone. We are all the barge changes. The atmosphere is like parched, half-blinded and tired. morning m ist because o f the constant bombardment of dust from the "sets" of . Standing b y . bags going up through the small opening. 4 , 6.40 p.m. Close down. The lighterman is The sacks containing the asbestos are ready to hatch up, and fee seamen are rotten; they rip open at the touch o f our standing by to replace the tank cover. Off hooks; the snotters cut through them as the with the boiler suit, a brief dusting down, weight is taken up by the crane. If the ganger and then the tedious haul back up the ladder.1 is careless, the sets hit the combing of the As the cold air enters our lungs attuned to tank, breaking sacks apart like stalks of 100 degrees of heat for 9 | hours, we feel a celery. Older dockers used to think that the bit high. We stand for a few moments to raw asbestos rotted the bags. We know i recuperate. The ganger, leaning back on fee different; the sacks are second-hand, used 4 ship's rail, looks at us. "Shipworker reckons time and again until they reach this state. . ,-<l - we are going to No. 3 tank tomorrow," he 2.45 pan. Tea and cakes are lowered down, f i murmured. "It is full of the blue stuff (blue; We smoke cigarettes quite freely, although asbestos, crocidolite). He might want us to smoking is prohibited throughout the dock. work all night." - * "J ^ ; reached fee South West India Docks. There followed a curious episode. On Monday 17 April 1967, the docks contro versy reached the House of Commons. Mrs Joyce Butler, MP for Wood Green, asked the Minister of Labour if he was aware of the cancer risk to dockers handling asbestos. The Minister's written reply was made the basis of a leaflet issued by the Asbestos Information Committee, a public relations body funded by the asbestos industry. For information The leaflet was entitled Asbestos and your health, with a subtitle in capitals stating that " THIS LEAFLET HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THE INFOR MATION OF DOCK WORKERS". The leaflet included a one-page report entitled, rather grandly, Inquiry and con clusions on the medical aspects o f working cargoes o f asbestos by dockers o fthe Port o f London and signed by Drs A. M. LawrenceSmith, Robert Murray and Kenneth Perry. The Medical Aspects report was written on 14 April 1967, only nine days after Ben Morris was told he had asbestosis and three days before Joyce Butler's Parliamentary question. It consists of five paragraphs and a footnote. Discussed the question Paragraph 1 details the investigations undertaken by Drs Perry, Murray and Lawrence-Smith; these apparently con sisted of meeting to discuss the question. They assert: "We have taken due count of published medical opinion and of official statements by HM Chief Inspector of Factories." It is not clear that Dr Lawrence-Smith took account of Wagner's paper when he wrote his Occupational health circular the previous year; neither is it clear that the PLA Medical Department took account of the Chief Inspector's annual report for 1947. Despite that report's strong evidence of a link between asbestos and lung cancer, no warning was given to dockers; no steps were taken to improve packaging of asbestos cargoes; no efforts were made to minimise dockers' exposure to asbestos dust. This exposure worsened as asbestos imports increased. Paragraph 2 states: "Our enquiries have found no case of injury to the health of a dockworker" caused by asbestos. Ap parently, these enquiries failed to unearth anything about Ben Morris. In paragraph 3, it states: "If bursting of bags occurs, then respiratory equipment would be advisable during cleaning-up operations." Dockers employed by fee PLA have described their working conditions prior to 1966; bursting of bags was a regular occurrence and the presence of loose asbestos fibres was the rule rather than the Health &Safety at Work April 1985 37 Compensation exception. None of this useful advice was forthcoming from the PLA Medical Depart ment, when it really mattered. In 1968, after an unsuccessful ap pearance before the DHSS Pneumoconiosis Panel, Ben Morris decided to claim compen sation from the PLA. The case was put in the hands of the legal department of the Transport and General Workers Union and handled by solicitors Pattinson and Brewers. Mistaken ideas In 1969, the solicitors received a discourag ing barrister's opinion which suggested that Ben's claim was unlikely to succeed. The barrister revealed several seriously mistaken ideas (in italics below) about dockers' work, which coloured his opinion: "(1) irregular contact with asbestos. " Asbestos was certainly imported regularly and imports climbed steeply throughout the 50s and early 60s. All imported asbestos passed through docks and was handled by dockers. The adjective "irregular" should be changed to "frequent". When contact did occur, there was heavy exposure to asbestos dust; the dangerous fibres remained in the lungs to do their damage afterwards. "(2) contact more or less in the open air (as distinctfrom a workroom)" Dockers have described how they actually worked inside a ship's hold or ship's tank and manhandled dusty sacks of asbestos before they were lifted by crane. "(3) contact in the main involving hand ling bagged asbestos-- that is to say, no process such as mixing, grinding, chipping, etc." Wagner's paper of 1960, which con nected asbestos and mesothelioma, de scribed cases of mesothelioma among men who had contact with hessian sacks contain ing asbestos. Often these sacks were des tined for this country where they would be handled by dockers. In 1964, W. Glyu Owen published a paper which mentioned two mesothelioma patients, women who had worked in sack repair factories.2 They had handled dusty, used hessian sacks, some of which had carried asbestos. A similar case in London was reported by Newhouse and Thompson in 19653. The Asbestos Information Committee saw fit to discuss this case in the leaflet Asbestos and your health: "there is no real proof that this docker's wife contracted mesothelioma from these circumstances". When judging the AIC claim, it should be examined in the context of nine reported mesothelioma victims who had similar exposure. The 1931 regulations prohibited use of permeable sacks within asbestos factories, but the hessian sacks handled by the women had carried asbestos to the factories. Subse quently, the sacks were emptied and sold off. London Chest HospitalX-ray o f dockworker who developed asbestosis When full, the sacks had travelled from Canada or South Africa and, in British ports, they had been handled by dockers. When empty, the sacks were still im pregnated with lethal asbestos fibres. This evidence, that the sacks handled by dockers carried a mesothelioma hazard, was available when Dr Lawrence-Smith, claimed: "The commodity, as found in ship's cargo, involves no occupational risk of mesothelioma." Made the link The barrister advising the TGWU legal department in 1967 evidently believed that no link between asbestos and mesothelioma was known until 1965. Of course, this is untrue. Wagner's paper made this link in 1960. Enquiries have failed to reveal why the TGWU legal department accepted such an inaccurate barrister's account, both of a docker's work and ofthe risk involved, since Ben's case was not carried further. U nfortunately, knowledge o f this issue in legal circles has not im proved, as shown in a b arrister's opinion obtained recently (from the same address). Philip Willson worked for the PLA on the same dock for 40 years, first as a docker and then as a quay foreman. He frequently handled asbestos. In 1981, he died o f mesothelioma (pulmonary asbestosis was also revealed). Mrs Willson suffered and died from the same disease (see News, page 12). As in the case of Ben Morris, a barrister's opinion was obtained, and he stated: "I have never before come across a case in which the handling of asbestos in its crude state has been found to have caused mesothelioma." Yet W agner's paper, which linked mesothelioma with asbestos, dealt mainly with cases of this type. The source of the barrister's misinformation is revealed when he refers to the notorious PLA circular of 1966. He states: "If the view expressed in that memorandum was wrong, it was in itself seriously misleading and would constitute clear evidence of negligence because it must have had the effect of lulling (Mr Willson) and his colleagues into a false sense of security." That the memorandum was wrong can be shown solely by reference to medical evidence available when it was written; it certainly seems to have misled the barrister! R eferences 1. Wagner, J. C. et al, "Diffuse pleural mesothelioma and asbestos exposure in the North Western Cape Province," British Journal o f Industrial Medicine (1960). 2. Glyn Owen, W., "Diffuse mesothelioma and exposure to asbestos dust in the Merseyside area," British M edical Journal (1964). 3. N e w h o u s e a n d T h o m p s o n , "Mesothelioma of pleura and per itoneum following exposure to asbestos in the London area," British Journal o f Industrial Medicine (1965). 38 Health & Safety at Work ApriI1985 circle number 24 oil Inquiry Card ) NEWS M inisters may relax health and safety law Government ministers are consider raising the threshold for produc ing a number of suggestions for ing a written safety policy to firms relaxing health and safety legislation with 20 employees (now five); for small firms despite a riposte from repealing the requirement to the Health and Safety Commission. notify the employment o f young The suggestions have been for people; warded by a number of depart repealing the requirement to post ments, including the Departments of up extracts of the Factories Act and Employment (DE) and Trade and the Offices, Shops and Railway Industry (DTI), to advise the Premises Act; Government on its policy of "easing prompt action on the Equal Op the legislative and administrative portunity Commission's recommen burdens on small businesses". dations on hours of work of women HSC chairman Dr John Cullen and young people. said he was unaware o f any It also suggested that a "simple proposals to relax safety rules but pamphlet" should be published sum acknowledged that the HSC had marising health and safety require been consulted about the "Rayner- ments for small firms and that all style scrutiny". legislative proposals should contain He said the HSC was "giving its "a small firms impact analysis show riposte" to the ideas floated. Both he ing how small firms are expected to and Health and Safety Executive comply". director general John Rimmington However, the Institution of Pro agreed that it would be impractical fessional Civil Servants, which rep to have small firms exempted from resents HSE inspectors, says that health and safety laws, he added. the DE team have discussed some The departments are keeping more far-reaching problems which tight-lipped but H S has a copy o f may also be considered by min- the Synopsis o f main findings o f a siters. One of these is the require DE survey o f290 small firms. ment to guard all machines, which This found that only one in nine some small firms felt to be an small firms mentioned health and unnecessary expense. safety requirements as a burden. The IPCS argues that the require The main criticisms were that in ment has existed since 1901 and is spectors were inflexible or inconsis based on sound and reasonable tent, or that requirements were experience, so it should not be impractical. It was also argued that changed "without any real proof of small firms had no influence over there being a real problem". new legislation. The DE team also discussed the The DE report states: "We con possibility of shifting the burden of sidered a variety of suggestions for proof in legal proceedings from the radical deregulation. In the end, accused to the prosecution, says the however, we concluded that all had IPCS. But the union's view is that, m ore com pelling a rg u m en ts since small firms are unlikely to be against." prosecuted, this change would be of It does, however, recommend little benefit and could be damaging. some less drastic relaxations: The DE declined to comment on the contents of the report. Cullen to open LISHE conference Health and Safety Commission chairman Dr John Cullen is to give the opening address at the inter national conference on health and safety at work which accompanies LISHE '85 exhibition at Olympia in London. The two-day conference, on 18 and 19 April is co-sponsored by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (see L IS H E preview, page 40). VDU o p e ra to rs face health risk By the deadline of 28 February 1985, H S had received 3,485 responses to the questionnaire VDU operators and health hazards pub lished in H S January 1985 (pages 28 and 29). Social sciences re searcher Jennifer Evans is' engaged in analysing the responses with a view to publishing a full report in H S June 1985. Meanwhile clerical workers' trade union APEX has issued its own report, which says that 64% of those surveyed complained that un suitable lighting led to headaches. A sbestos kills husbamcS and w ife Colchester coroner Dr Charles the PLA was negligent in inade Clarke found that Mrs Winifred quately informing dockers of the Willson,' wife of an East London dangers o f handling asbestos. He docker, died last November as a revealed that the PLA had not yet result of an industrial disease, paid the 4,000 compensation that mesothelioma, when her only con Mrs Willson had agreed to accept tact with asbestos dust had been in for the loss of her husband. washing her husband's work The Society for the Prevention of clothes. Joseph Willson had died of Asbestosis and Industrial Diseases the same disease in 1981, and Dr said that Mrs Willson's case showed Clarke also presided over his in why mesothelioma should be in quest. vestigated by electron microscopy, Mr Willson worked for the Port which is able to detect very small of London Authority for 40 years, fibres of white asbestos that have first as a docker and then as a quay often been missed. foreman. He frequently handled SPAID secretary Nancy Tail cargoes of asbestos, and he carried said these investigations are needed home asbestos dust on his clothes to establish the connection between and in his hair. asbestos and mesothelioma. "Indus D r Clarke took the unusual step trial injuries benefit is paid in only of instructing the Pneumoconiosis one-'out-of-three o f the 500 Medical Panel to investigate Mrs mesothelioma deaths every year. Willson's death because the PMP How many of the deaths for which had been unwilling to look at it since no benefit is paid are due to non- Mrs Willson was not exposed to occupational exposure to asbestos asbestos dust during paid employ and how serious is 'the risk o f such ment. non-occupational exposure to the Mr & Mrs Willson's son, Peter, is general community?" asked Mrs seeking compensation for his Tail. mother's death from the Port of (See feature on asbestos and London Authority. He alleges that dockworkers onpages 36 to 38). National PCB survey d e m a n d e d Dutch-based transformer manufac progressive ban on PCB-filled trans turer Holec called a press con formers. Herr Schmid said: "PCB ference at the House of Commons transformers have been installed in last month to demand a national areas where there are high fire risks survey to establish the location and and/or high safety requirements age of all poly-chlorinated-biphenyl- (Historic city centres, department filled transformers in the country. stores, hospitals, old people's Holec managing director Brian homes, etc). The transformer itselfis Beck pointed out the PCB was so not a primary fire source, but, if a highly toxic and carcinogenic that fire in the vicinity exposes it to the European Communities had temperatures exceeding 300C, the issued a Directive to member states PCBs produce highly toxic poly- banning its sale from 30 June 1986 chlorodibenzofurances (PCDFs), onwards. Mr Beck's interest is in putting firemen at acute risk and, in completely replacing ageing PCB- certain circumstances, contaminat filled transformers with modern, ing wide areas. Fire brigades are safe equipment. therefore urging that PCB trans Germ an Socialist Euro-M P formers be replaced. Gerhard Schmid has called for a S izew ell inquiry en d s The mammoth public inquiry into Installations Inspectorate should be the proposed Sizewell B pressurised settled, at a cost of 4 million, by water nuclear reactor is at an end. January 1986. The final words came from the Lord Silsoe QC, for the CEGB, Central Electricity Generating said the CEGB "rightly did not try Board, which asserted that there to plan for a major nuclear accident. was "no reason for rejecting the This was because for all practical proposed PWR power station on purposes such accidents could be safety grounds". It said the 19 discounted, and because it was not outstanding safety issues unresolved reasonably practicable to plan for between the CEGB and the Nuclear them". 12 Health & Safety at Work April 1985