Riding the Green Wave: Can We Use Environmental Laws to Regulate Occupational Hazards?
Source: American Public Health Association
Beth Rosenberg - APHA TALK Nov. 1999 "Riding the Green Wave"
Abstract
Studying silica control has made me think about social movements. The labor movement is weak in the US, so occupational health and safety has had to piggy back on other stronger movements. I want to spend the next 10 minutes talking about how silica control in the 1930's-1960s in the Vermont granite industry piggy backed on the stronger, public health movement, and then talk about my efforts, in conjunction with others, to regulate silica under what is perceived of as an environmental law, the Mass. TURA.
A few years ago, Chuck Levenstein from UMass Lowell, and I decided to study a successful occupational health program, which was the Vermont silicosis program of 1938 so we could tease out the reasons for its success and apply those lessons to today. For those of you who don't know, silicosis is one of the dust diseases, like black lung and asbestosis. It's caused by inhalation of silica particles. Exposures occur in stone cutting, cement, clay and porcelain work, foundry work, sand blasting. Four years ago silica was declared a lung carcinogen by IARC, so it's more than just dust. Vermont has been a center for the granite industry since the late 1880s. It produced and continues to produce monuments, gravestones and building materials like counter tops. Our question was, what was going on in Vermont that allowed the state labor and management to get together and eliminate silicosis over a twenty year period by installing ventilation equipment in the granite sheds, having regular inspections of the equipment by the state and doing medical surveillance, that is, chest X-rays, of granite cutters?
There were several factors in the social context that drove the program.
As background, since Barre Vermont was the epicenter of the program and the granite industry in Vermont, you should know something about the town. At the turn of the century, it was different form the rest of Vermont. In contrast to the Yankee farmers populating the rest of the state, Barre's citizenry was mostly recent immigrants. From 1880-1910 the population quadrupled because of expansion of the granite industry. By 1914, nearly a 1/4 of the city's population was Italian - they had been skilled marble carvers in the old country. Scots were the next largest immigrant group after the French-Canadians. Both peoples brought with them a strong tradition of trade unionism and class consciousness, By 1900, more than 90% of Barre's workforce was unionized. Vermont's first elected socialist mayor was in Barre in 1912. There were lots of strikes to protest H&S conditions, the use of uncomfortable and dust-producing technology and work regulations. For example, the strike of 1909 successfully outlawed a polishing tool called the bumper so called because it was both jarring to work with and it bumped men off because it produced much dust. The socialist idea of workers exerting some control over the technology and intervening in the production process was not radical in this city: it was normal.
Another important thread in the social context is that silica was a known hazard. Since the turn of the century, granite cutters were complaining about the dust evil and the dust menace that was shortening their lives. By the 1930s, partly because of the Gaulley Bridge Scandal, silicosis was a household word. In 1936, labor secretary Francis Perkins ran a "stop Silicosis campaign" so it was a well known hazard to the public as well as workers.
Another factor was that silicosis was associated with the plague of the day. At the time, the cause of the association wasn't known. Some people thought that the TB bacillus was carried into the lungs on silica particles. Others thought that silicotic lung was more vulnerable to a TB infection, but whatever it was, there was a strong association between TB and silica dust. Public health officials, granite workers and insurance carriers knew that to control TB, they had to control dust in the Granite sheds.
The third factor was that there was a labor shortage in the 1920s. The granite industry had such a bad, unhealthy reputation that fathers discouraged their sons from going into the trade. The viability of the industry was threatened and manufacturers knew they had to do something. The state was also concerned because granite was Vermont most important industry, next to agriculture. The union was strong, because the cutters were skilled artisans and they were irreplaceable, and the labor shortage made them even stronger, but it still wasn't enough to bring ventilation into the granite sheds.
Finally, in 1936, federal money form the Social security act came in to establish occ, hygiene divisions so that there was funding for staff and equipment. Everyone, the state, management and workers had incentive to control the dust.
Even though back then the labor movement was strong, , occ. health still had to piggy back on other stronger movements. In the 30's, PH was strong. The VT, silicosis program, although it benefitted workers, was mainly a public health, TB control program. In Vermont, the program to inspect ventilation the sheds, and x_ray the workers was located in the TB division of the Public Health Department. If Silica were not associated with TB, the plague of the day, I don't think it would have been controlled. Now, until very recently, we didn't have a strong PH movement, current events have changed that but 3 years a go when I was thinking about how to control silica Levenstein and I thought about piggybacking on the environmental movement - so we looked for a way to "ride the green wave". In 1987, silica was declared a carcinogen and since Americans fear cancer more that most other diseases, this is good for silica control efforts. What could be more desirable to control than a carcinogenic air pollutant?
For the past 3 years in MA, we've been trying to get silica regulated as a hazardous substance under the Toxics Use Reduction Act. This law was promulgated 1989 and among other things, says that if a manufacturing concern uses more than 10,000 lbs of a substance per year that is listed on the hazardous substance and toxics list, the company must pay a fee to the state for the privilege of using a toxic. The law was designed to encourage the use of safer substitutes, and indeed the law is working: the use of substances on the list has dropped substantially over the last decade.
The law was supported by both environmentalists and labor but it is perceived as an environmental law. The effort to regulate mainly an occupational hazard under the Toxics Use Reduction Act has been frustrating and instructive. It highlights how workers are harmed by the nonsensical division between occupational and environmental health. At every step of the way, the fact that silica is mainly hazardous for workers was used as a reason not to list it. Industry argues that silica is OSHA's purview, so it shouldn't be regulated under TURA. The Administrative Council, which is a panel of governor appointed heads of state agencies that makes the final judgment about listing or delisting a substance, is reluctant to deal with anything that steps on industry's toes. Even though the law specifically says a substance must be listed if it is anticipated to cause harm to the public, workers, or the environment, the Council is behaving as if it was being asked to deal with an issue beyond its scope. Even the consulting firm, hired by the Toxics Use Reduction Institute, which is a nice, environmental firm in Cambridge, didn't know that the law applied to workers, until I pointed it out. I thought that listing a carcinogen would be a cinch, but it turns out that because the carcinogen is mainly a danger to workers, it's been a rocky road and we don't know what's going to happen. Right now, we're waiting for the decision, but I wanted to bring this forth as an example of the importance of integrating occ. and env. health and I'd like to ask for suggestions about how we're going to accomplish this goal.
Author: B. J. Rosenberg.
This page updated Friday March 26 2004