Asbestos - Killer Dust - Worker-community Guide - How to Fight Hazards of Asbestos and Its...

NO

KILLER DUST A worker/community guide: how to fight the hazards of asbestos and its substitutes

I WAY TO USE ANY KILLER A SBESTO3

This document

insOpageiJ

The British Society for Social Responsibility in Science was set up in 1968. BSSRS believes that science and

technology are not neutral, but are geared to profit and the maintenance of the present political system. BSSRS

has a number of working groups, one of which is the Work Hazards Group. Others include groups working on Race and "Intelligence", the Politics of Food, and Nuclear Power.

The Work Hazards Group is composed of local branches

around the country. We believe that significant im-

provements in working conditions can best be achieved

by workers becoming well informed, and by organising at their place of work; and that in the long-term, the conflict between profit and healthy working conditions can only be resolved in a socialist society in which

working people have control over their lives.

We publish Hazards Bulletin, pamphlets and leaflets, teach on Health and Safety courses for Trade Unionists, and answer enquiries about health and safety. We support the establishment of, and work with, area committees of Trade Unionists and residents and local

Health and Safety Groups, such as those listed in

appendix I, and the provision of effective back-up services on health and safety within the Trade Unions.

Published August 1979 by BSSRS Publications Limited, 9 Poland Street, London W1V 3DG, 01-437 2728.

Copyright © BSSRS Publications Limited, 1979 ISBN Pb 0 9502541 3 4

ASBESTOS KILLER DUST A worker/community guide: how to fight the hazards of asbestos and its substitutes

If you have any comments — bad or good — on this booklet, additions and so on please let us have them for a revised edition. We are particularly interested in hearing of any organised action taken over the hazards of asbestos and its substitutes — successful or otherwise.

A booklet of this nature, with so much organised action, owes much more to those who took the action and communicated it than to any author. I hope to have gone someway to catching the tremendous odds against such people and the fact that

despite this they have often won. Beyond the, in so many ways

depressing, story of the hazards of asbestos, their actions shine like a light to us all. The capitalist system of exploitation and reducing people to less value than the products they make or use is not invincible. People acting together with a socialist

perspective will bring about its collapse — as the difficult struggles over asbestos show: sooner than expected perhaps! Of all the people that helped me, below are those I can remember. To those I've missed: thanks a lot and to all in-

volved, hope I have done justice to your efforts. Their names are at random as they came into my head. Tanya and Seb Schmoller, Pete Marsden, Jim 0 'Neil!, Nancy Tait, Laurie Flynn, Barry Castleman, Terry Bellamy, Jim Burns, Joe Walker, Tom McFadden, Jose Caba, Mike Kahn, Martin Brewer, John McMorrow, Brian Hodge, Ellys Tynan, Pat Kinnersly, H. Pezerat, George Corbyn, David Murray, Pat and Margaret McFadden, Gail Yoakum, John Healey, Dan Berman, John Bentley, Pat Twomey, Brian and Rosemary Cu bitt, Ben

Bartlett, Bryan Rees, Jean Grisel, Dave Hayes, Mrs E.J. Curtis, Jim Franklin, John Todd, Micky Fenn, Les Stephenson, Leo

Puyker, Greg Cohn, Michael Siefert, Tom Amey, Mary Philips and Tanw.ra Kalom.

Of course, none of the above bear any responsibility for the

final booklet which is the full responsibility of the authoi Alan J.P. Dalton. Cartoons and graphics are by Liz Mackie, P/it! Evans, Nick

Kavanagh, Fiona Carpenter and Oliver Duke.

Typesetting by Rosemary Ahmed, Printacolour (TU), 101 Praed Street, London W2 Design, layout and front cover by Eve Barker, 232 Mare

Street, London E8 (01-986 5861). Index by Robin Bonner This pamphlet was produced with the aid of a grant from the

Joseph Rown tree Social Services Trust. Printed by the Russell Press, 45 Gamble Street, Nottingham NG 7 4ET (0602 74505). Distributed by Trade Union Bookservice, 265 Seven Sisters Road, London N4 2DE.

Contents

Page 7 Introduction 7 Total estimate UK asbestos deaths 8 The Hebden Bridge massacre

15 Chapter 1 What is asbestos? 17 World asbestos production

SECTION U 19 Types of asbestos

20 Chapter 2 What asbestos does to your health? social background 21 Odds of getting asbestos disease

21 Asbestosis 25 Lung cancer 26 Asbestos smoking and lung cancer 27 Mesotheljoma (cancer) 34 Other cancers caused by asbestos exposure 41 Health checks for people exposed to asbestos

44 Chapter 3 Excuses, excuses 45 Asbestos cement is a special case 48 It's only white asbestos 52 Asbestos is indispensable 55 Brakes are dangerous

Chapter 4 Your protectors 57 The asbestos industry 62 South Africa: asbestos mines 64 The government 66 1969 Asbestos Regulations — summary 73 Advisory Committee on Asbestos 79 Trade Unions 80 The good TUC submission to the Advisory Committee on Asbestos — summary 87 Scientists and Doctors

102 Chapter 5 Substitutes for asbestos

SECTION 103 Glass fibre health hazards

The prevention of 107 Health risks of other 'safe' replacements asbestos diseases for asbestos

110 Substitutes for asbestos — what they are and where to get them (table)

114 Agreed CEGB procedure for working with man made fibres

116 A safer glass fibre standard

119 Chapter 6 Removal of asbestos dust 119 What is a safe dust level? 123 Measuring the dust level 129 Ventilation and extraction of the asbestos

dust 135 Efficiency of some portable extraction

units (table)

141 Chapter 7 Working with asbestos and its substitutes

142 Dockyard asbestos disease 150 Servicing brake and clutch linings 157 British Rail 158 British Rail work methods 160 Sealing and stripping asbestos 163 An improved stripping procedure at Yale

University 169 The basic stripping procedure

172 Chapter 8 Personal protection 174 An 'approved' respirator 176 Protective clothing

179 Chapter 9 Environmental asbestos 180 Asbestos in the air 188 Measurement of asbestos in the air 188 Typical asbestos levels in city and country

air (table) 191 Asbestos in water and soil

198 Chapter 10 The hospitals scandal

204 Chapter 11 Asbestos in housing estates and schools

4

213 Chapter 12 Living near an asbestos factory or dumps

227 Dumping asbestos waste near flats and a nursery

232 Chapter 13 Compensation

240 Chapter 14 Asbestos is political 241 Asbestos industry profits 245 US asbestos industry exports hazards 249 Some examples of world wide actions

over asbestos hazards 249 America 251 Australia (including conditions won) 254 Canada 256 France 256 Greek workers fight asbestos hazards 256 Holland 257 Russia and China 258 Asbestos is the symptom, the disease is...

260 Appendix 1: Help to fight asbestos hazards

264 Appendix 2: Further reading on asbestos hazards

268 Appendix 3: Names and addresses of makers of asbestos substitutes

267 Appendix 4: The identification and analysis of asbestos including table of organisations undertaking analysis 278 Appendix 5: Asbestos survey from a TU group (HASSEL)

283 Index

S

This booklet is dedicated to the many working class people who have been murdered by the asbestos industry and to those beginning to fight back for the right for a healthy and safe workplace.

Introduction

A US Government report released late in 1978 estimated that more than two million American workers will probably die of cancer because of asbestos exposure at their jobs. The report b the National Institute of Environmental Healt Sciences also stated that work-related cancer was responsible for 1 in 5 of total cancer cases. In industrialised countries cancer is second only to heart disease as the major killer. In Britain, with roughly one quarter of the population of the US, work exposure to asbestos will kill 500,000 in the next thirty years using these estimates. This death rate should be compared with that caused by some other disasters: Some UK disasters

265,000 - Armed forces killed in the Second World

800,000 -

Killed by the Black Death (bubonic, pneumonic and septicaemic plague) 1347-50 225,000 Killed by the great flu epidemic (Sept.-Nov. 500,000 Estimate of number of people who will be

killed by asbestos (1978 -2018)

Asbestos exposure will kill more people in Britain than were killed in the armed forces during the Second World War.

This estimate represents a real epidemic of asbestos-related diseases. It is no accident or unforeseen disaster: as we shall see: it could have been prevented. It wasn't because we live in a society that allows companies to make a profit

7

8

irrespective of the effects of its products on its workforce or consumers.

Asbestos deaths could have been prevented In 1899 a British asbestos spinner aged thirty- three went to see a chest specialist about attacks of 'bronchitis'. He told the specialist, Dr Montague Murray, that he was the last survivor of ten workers in the shop with whom he first started working. They all died at about thirty years of age. He himself died in April 1900. A port-mortem confirmed that he did not have tuberculosis (consumption), but died from extensive lung scarring (asbestosis) caused by the breathing of asbestos dust. This was reported to the 1906 British Government enquiry into compensation for industrial diseases.

By 1930 the British Government had woken up and an official enquiry, the Merewether and Price Report, confirmed that there was a real epidemic of asbestos diseases among British asbestos workers. As a direct result limited Government regulations concerning the 'safe' use of asbestos were introduced in 1931 and became effective in 1933. The problem of asbestos diseases was therefore assumed solved. Little more was heard about the health hazards of asbestos for the next thirty years. Then, in the 1960s, the truth began to seep out, at first in medical journals and then in the newspapers. The lid finally blew in March 1976 with the horrifying revelations by the Ombudsman, Sir Alan Marre, into the massacre of asbestos workers at Cape's Hebden Bridge asbestos factory.

The massacre at Hebden Bridge The investigations into the massacre at Hebden Bridge have revealed the real side of the 'responsible' asbestos industry. Cape Industries, who ran the asbestos mill from 1939 until its closure in 1970, are no backstreet outfit. They are a multinational concern second only to the UK asbestos giants Turner and Newall. In 1939 Cape Asbestos Ltd (now called Cape Industries) opened a factory named Acre Mill at

Acre Mill asbestos factory, Hebden Bridge is the large building at the top of this photo. So far 262 out of 2,200 workers have asbestos-related diseases. (Michael Kahn)

Hebden Bridge near Halifax. This factory made mainly asbestos textile products from raw asbestos and was therefore subject to the 1931 Asbestos Regulations. The factory closed thirty- one years later in 1970 leaving a legacy of death and suffering for the surrounding community. Approximately 2,200 workers have been employed at the factory during the thirty-one years of its operations. After the Second World War many immigrant workers were employed and it has proved impossible to trace many of these. But, so far 262 (12 per cent) of the workforce have developed crippling asbestos diseases.

9

Late 1 940s — women eating and drinking among asbestos at Acre Mill, Hebden Bridge. (Report London)

Deaths at Hebden Bridge due to asbestos exposure1 Lung cancer or Mesothehoma 44 Heart failure 18 Pneumonia 11

Asbestosis 4

Six people from one extended family have contracted or died of asbestos-related diseases, and over £2,000,000 compensation has so far been paid out.

Most of the workers who suffered were employed directly in the manufacturing process, but others worked as gardeners, office workers, canteen workers, painters and lorry drivers. As the local specialist, Dr Bertram Mann, comments: 'There is clearly a real hazard . . . among workers not directly engaged in the handling of this

I Bertram Mann, 'Pulmonary Asliestosis with Special Reference to an Fpidcmic at I-lebdcn Bridge,Journal of the

Royal College of Physicians, vol 12. July 1978, p.297.

10

77 have died of the following complaints related to asbestos exposure:

Asbestos workers speak:

Brian Schnacke, who worked at the factory from 1954-59: 'The extractors were blocked most of the time. We often stood in the blue dust a foot deep.'

mineral.' Symptoms took from two to thirty years to develop, with an average of eighteen years. One thing Dr Mann found out was that you can be suffering from asbestosis with no apparent change in your chest X-ray. One worker was employed for only nine weeks stacking asbestos materials on a conveyor belt when he was thirty-five years old. By the time he was forty-three an X-ray showed that he was suffering from serious lung damage. He died of deadly asbestos cancer — Mesothelioma — at the early age of forty-eight. From 1949 onwards the factory inspectorate found conditions at the asbestos factory were unsatisfactory and breaking the 1931 Asbestos Regulations, yet nothing was done: an illustra- tion of the pathetic state of our industrial policemen — toothless watchdogs, watching people die.

It's worth noting that the factory inspectorate considered this factory, in terms of its dust coi?rol methods, 'at least as good as average, if not better.' So you can imagine (or can you?) the bad factories. The response of the British Government to the revelations of the Hebden Bridge massacre was, predictably, to set up an enquiry. The asbestos industry itself launched into a massive £500,000 advertising campaign to convince people that asbestos was safe.

11

Brian Schnacke (Michael Kahn)

John Montgomery, who worked there in 1942-43 and 1946-47 'One mask was provided for 12 workers and we had no idea

of the dangers. During the war 4-ft extractor fans

faced houses across from the factory, and blew dust straight at them and the school. At the asbestos tip the kids used to make snow- balls of it.'

Ron Slattery, who worked at the mill for four years in the 1950s 'How this firm got away with their dust exposure was

really criminal. I have seen, in the Sectional Department, the dust extractors blowing it back seven or eight times a day. After this experience of the dust continuously blowing back, I vomitted into a bowl of clean water and I brought up a ball of asbestos dust off my stomach — it rolled out in a perfect ball, and my wife picked it up, and I thought of going Out Ofl the golf course with it! I led the lads out it was so dusty — of course they said we had to wait till the week-end before the ducts could be cleaned. I want to

see this never happen again. You know what they call this pub (the Swan)? The Asbestos Arms! It's very weak for union activity around here — that's why they got away with it.'

12

2 Michael Morris and Angela Singer,'l'heatre Company Sacked after Ashesiosis I'lay', Guardian, 24 August 1978.

No plays on asbestos

In August 1978 .Northern theatre group — Theatre Mobile — was sacked by its sponsors the Mid Pennine Arts Association. They had just put on a play about the massacre at Hebden Bridge. The subject of the play, Arthur Montgomery, an asbestos worker at Hebden Bridge, died in August 1978 in his early fifties. He, his father and father-in-law had all contacted asbestosis. In May 1978 Cape Industries, the owners of the Hebden Bridge asbestos factory, had taken legal action to secure the return of a confidential internal memo, Background Notes on the Anti-Asbestos Lobby, that Cape's had sent the theatre group by mistake.2

Confusion over asbestos There is public confusion over asbestos, Typical of it is this letter sent to the British Society for Social Responsibility in Science in May 1977:

I recently read an article in the Evening Standard regarding the risks attached to asbestos which has caused me a considerable amount of concern. In November of

last year a local firm of plumbing contractors installed central heating for us. This necessitated an old Aga cooker being dis- mantled. On returning home that evening the whole kitchen/breakfast room/lobby and hail area were covered with a white dust. There was also a pile of this dust on my front doorstep, which, of course, my one year, three and five year olds soon got their hands into. At the time we were assured it was white dirt, so I was not much concerned, but simply annoyed by the lack of care the contractors had shown in tidy- ing up their mess.

Three weeks later, on New Year's Eve to be exact, we were advised that this was white asbestos. Obviously this news was a tremendous shock. I phoned the doctor who said it wasn't a risk, and that nothing was medically necessary; I then phoned the Asbestos Information Centre who endorsed this opinion and gave me a considerable amount of reassurance.

Perhaps you can imagine my reaction when I read this article? I'm basically not a neur- otic person, but I feel my house, the out- buildings (where the Aga parts were stored for four weeks), and the yard (where the bags of asbestos had been left) have been contaminated. This is a very old house and I feel it will be years before this dust has been completely eradicated from all its nooks and crannies.

I should be very grateful for your comments, but please don't send me any booklets etc regarding symptoms of asbestos-associated diseases, which I feel would only cause me further concern. My husband has told me not to write to you as he feels any information you five me will only aggravate the problem. I m afraid Ijust can't forget about it as he suggests and am really just hoping to get a sense of proportion about the whole thing.

Compare the attitude here of the doctor and the

13

14

Asbestos Information Centre (presumably Com-

mittee), with the following statements by world authorities on asbestos:

At present it is not possible to assess whether there is a level of (asbestos) ex-

posure in humans below which an increased risk of cancer would not occur.3 Evaluation of all available human data provides no evidence for a threshold or 'safe' level of asbestos exposure.. . only a ban can ensure

against Carcinogenic (cancer) effects of asbestos.4

Clearly there is possible an increased health risk

to the family described in the above letter —

however small, and it could have been prevented. Obviously the asbestos industry benefits from the state of confusion it has helped create as

regards the real hazards of asbestos. The purpose of this pamphlet is to help eliminate this con-

fusion, and also to help anyone exposed to asbestos — whether at work or at home — to minimise, if not eliminate, the health risks to themselves, their family and friends.

3 'AsbestoS', International Agency for Research on Cancer,

vol 14, World Health Organisation, 1977.

4 'Revised Recommended Asbestos Standard', covering

letter from Dr John F. Finklea, Director, US National Institute

for Occupational Safety and Health, 15 December 1976.

A FEW VIOL11 WKO WONT

r4 T$E.

jjWE.

Chapter 1 What is asbestos?

SECTION Asbestos diseases The medical and social background

Asbestos is a mineral rock mined from the earth in much the same way as any other mineral, such as iron or copper. Its useful technical property is that it can be divided into millions of fine fibres that are often silky and soft to the touch but also strong. Because it is fibrous, many people think it is a plant product like cotton or rope: in fact, as recently as the l960s, a major shareholder in an asbestos company, visiting the source of his supplies in South Africa, asked his manager where the plantations were!

15

eI

.7-A:

.'. • -v3

• 7/ j; V\/ CROCIDOLITE ASBESTOS

blue r

CHRYSOTILE ASBESTOS white

16

F AV �_.LbL7iC'ff.

AMOSITE ASBESTOS brown

GLASS MICRO- FIBRE

—------ SOpni

r CARBON FIERE HUMAN HAIR

A comparison of the sizes of different types of common industrial fibres (including asbestos) with a human hair. Unless present in very high con-

centrations they cannot he secn with the nakcd cyc in normal ligh ing conditions. (Medical Research Council)

source: World Health Organisation, Asbestos, IARC, vol 141977 p.29

But it is just this property of asbestos (the ability to break into millions of fine invisible fibres) that also makes it a serious and so far uncon- trolled health hazard, for these fine fibres can be breathed deep into the lungs where damage can be done that maims and kills by irreparably scarring the lungs and causing cancer.

Although asbestos was known to the ancients (4,500 years ago Finnish potters used it to strengthen their clay), it was not until the late nineteenth century, when good lagging was required for steam engines, that asbestos really became an industrial material. Even so, the total world production of all types of asbestos before 1930 was less than the yearly production today, as the table shows. The health hazards of asbestos have been known for over 70 years. A UK Government report definitely established an epidemic of asbestos disease in 1930, yet no effort was made to control asbestos production at a time when it would have been easy. In fact the past 15 years have seen production double. And although there is talk of only 20-30 years' supply of asbestos left in the earth, at the present rate of extraction a far greater amount is going to be spread around than in the past 25 years.

Making asbestos products in the 1 930s. (OCA WI

17

Asbestos production Year Production

(millions of kilograms)

to 1930 1960 1970 1973 1974 1975 1976

below 5,000 2,210 3,490 4,093 4,115 4,560 5,178

a,,, . S - —

Asbestos fibre production in 1973

(short tons 200/b, 0.907 of a metric ton or tonne)

USSR 2,200,000 Canada 1,974,000 South Africa 350,000 Rhodesia 170,000 USA 130,000 Italy 130,000 China 100,000 Swaziland 45,000 Brazil 30,000 Cyprus 28,000 Japan 20,000 Yugoslavia 15,000 Finland 12,000 India 3,000 Others 5,000

source: Public Health Risks of Exposure to Asbestos, EEC Report 1977 p.28

The major mining countries are the USSR and Canada, with other large deposits being worked in China, South Africa, Italy, USA and Rhodesia.

No really good studies exist on the health hazards of asbestos mining; but the studies that exist (on Russian and Canadian miners) report increased deaths from lung scarring (asbestosis) and lung and stomach cancer.

18 Mining asbestos bearing rock.

right: 'Fluffy 'asbestos fibre has even been used in the past as sno"in the theatre.

Crude asbestos rock

Types of asbestos There are six different types of asbestos, split into two groups on the basis of their physical and chemical properties: Asbestos

Serpentine Group Amphibole Group

Chrysotile Crocidolite (knownas (knownas 'white asbestos') 'blue asbestos')

Amosite (known as 'brown asbestos')

Anthophylite Tremol ite

Actinolite

Only Chrysotile ('white'), Crocidolite ('blue'), Amosite ('brown') and Anthophylite are in common industrial use. Although these colours are apparent when freshly mined, aging and heat turns all asbestos a similar colour and only scientific tests can identify the type for certain. These days 95 per cent of the asbestos mined is Chrysotile or 'white' asbestos. Asbestos can be found in association with other rocks and minerals, and has been found contaminating iron, hard rock gold mines, vermiculite (ironically used as a safer substitute for asbestos) and talc. It is now said to end up in more than 3,000 products. Its main uses are: asbestos cement pipes, asbestos cement sheeting, flooring and ceiling products, roofing products, packing and gaskets, thermal and insulation products, brakes and clutches, coating agents, plastics, textiles and paper. In one form or another asbestos is around us everywhere — as asbestos roofing on your garage or garden shed; brake and clutch shoes on your car; the seal around your cooker; fire proofing at home and work; in the tube or train you take to work, and so on. The list is endless. Asbestos health hazards can affect us all.

19

20

Chapter 2 What asbestos does to your health

Breathing into your lungs asbestos fibres invisible to the naked eye causes or contributes to the following diseases: Asbestosis a disabling and ultimately fatal scarring of the lungs. Lung cancer a painful and nearly always fatal disease. Mesothelioma a rapidly fatal and painful cancer of the lining of the lung or stomach nearly always due only to asbestos exposure. These diseases have several things in common: a They all take a long time to show up: at least 10 years, more often 20, and for Meso- thelioma as long as 40. This is handy for the management of asbestos firms, for how many people stay in a job for 20 years these days? It also makes it difficult for Trade Union Safety Reps to convince their members of the hazards — unlike, say, an unsafe machine, where the immediate danger can be seen.

b The symptoms in all cases are not specific from the first: often they are put down to 'a bit of chestiness', or to bronchitis, or to smoking. The asbestos diseases are nearly always killers: even getting away from the dust will not protect you because it is usually too late by the time you have symptoms. Preventing the inhalation of any asbestos dust is the only cure for asbestos diseases.

yT

Medical studies have shown' that in some jobs four out of ten (40 per cent) of workers exposed to asbestos have died of asbestos diseases. Put this another way: would you start a job with ten other people when you knew it would kill four of you? Working with asbestos is a form of Russian roulette — the odds vary, but in some cases there are four live bullets in every ten.

Asbestosis In asbestosis the delicate tissue of the lung is scarred and thickened by the action of the asbestos fibres. This is called 'fibrosis'. From your first exposure to the dust it will commonly take ten or twenty years for you to get the first symptoms. By then it is too late for any medical treatment: there is no cure.

Asbestos does most of its damage deep into your lungs — in the alveoli. These delicate air-sacks are slowly destroyed by scar tissue.

I A.N. Rohn and others, 'Asbestos Pollution', Science, vol 197, 1977, p.716.

21

soft

Vocal

22

Asbestosis has been called a one-symptom disease: shortness of breath. As doctors have observed, this can take the form of a 'terrible tightness of the chest'. Other common symptoms are: unproductive or dry cough, clubbing of the fingers, lack of energy, more frequent chest infections, weight loss. On clinical examination noises ('Basal rales and crepitations' or rattles) are heard in the lung and both the X-ray and lung function tests ('reduced transfer factor') are affected.

You do not have to have a heavy exposure to asbestos to develop asbestosis. But there is no doubt that heavy exposure makes you more likely to et it quicker. A safe level of asbestos exposure is not yet known and since over half the people who develop asbestosis go on to develop cancer, it is unlikely that a safe level will ever be found. Although a few years' exposure is normally needed to develop asbestosis, it can develop with only a few weeks' exposure (see p. 218). The numbers of workers receiving compensation from the Government is still rising: in 1951 it was 20, in 1961 it had risen to 53, and in 1976 to 189. For many reasons these are gross underestimates — limited compensation; misdiagnosis and so on. A standard text on industrial lung diseases2 comments, 'There is little doubt that these figures represent a real increase in the prevalence of the disease.'

2 Morgan and Seaton, Occupational Lung Diseases, Saunders, 1975

Official cases of asbestosis

as diagnosed by the Pneumoconiosis Boards 1969-76

1969 134 1973 143 1970 153 1974 139 1971 145 1975 161 1972 125 1976 189

Source: Written answer to Max Madden, MP, Hansard 15 June 1977

An indication of the type of fixing of these figures comes from the USA. In 1973, in an independent and authoritative medical journal,3 two doctors reported on the amount of asbestosis in several US asbestos factories. The factories were studied from 1941 to 1969 and the doctors reported 'only' 18 deaths from asbestosis. Nothing to be proud of since this was 18 deaths that should not have occurred. But, the state of New Jersey alone awarded workmen's compensation for sufferers of asbestosis to 455 workers at one of the plants studied!4 With underestimates like that what can you say about the accuracy of any official figures?

Bearing these comments in mind in the years 1969 to 1976 alone there were almost 1,200 cases of 'official' asbestosis (see Table) and the incidence was still rising. This will carry on for the next thirty years at least. Clearly even officially we are talking about hundreds of thousands of preventable and painful people suffering from a 'disease' that was unknown 100 years ado. A disease the asbestos industry has created in the 20th century.

Case one: Bob Smith

My fingers swell up and my ankles. When I try and grip anything, I get an ache... I can't carry anything like a box or suitcase and I get out of breath with the slightest exertion. Some- times I get a terrific coughing bout and the wife has to hit my back... it's like someone getting hold of you and gripping you tight and when she hits me across the back it releases, and then I get the pain. It's gradually

getting worse. I am down from 11/2 to 8 stone. I used to eat five meals a day but now I can't eat five meals in a fortnight. If I eat too much I bring it back up again. When Bob Smith said this, in 1972, he was 46 and certified 50 per cent disabled by asbestosis. He looked 20 years older than his 46 years. He worked at Central Asbestos, London, from 1958 to 1966. (Gillman and Woolf 'The Dangerous Dust' Sunday Times Magazine 2 April 1972)

23

Bob Smith, aged 46, sitting with his father who is 23 years older. (Sunday Times)

3 Enterline and Henderson, Archives ofEnvfronmental Health, vol 27, 1973, p.312. 4 Revised Recommended Asbestos Standard', US National Institute for Occupational Health and Safety, December 1976 p.28.

Case two: Grateful for a job After the war he started on boiler covering.., he was

grateful for the work because he was in the pits on short time before 1939.

Although he never brought his clothes home, the asbestos dust lay thick on his hair, ordinary clothes and shoes. We just used to give them a bit of a shak- ing in the back yard. I didn't know much about precautions. He did once mention that they borrowed masks

from another job 'cos there wasn't any on their site.

They first found out after he smashed his finger up when chopping wood. His doctor noticed his fingers — they were all bulbous, sort of risen and hard. He was sent to a specialist and was certified as having asbestosis. Yet on his sick note went the word 'bronchitis', until near the end when his pension rose from 30 to 100 per cent. All the treatment he got was tablets. He never did go into hospital. It took eight years for the asbestosis to take its toll, during which time his weight fell from 15 stones to below 7 stone.

Yes, he went through it I can tell you... terrible... he just sat there all the time.., never went to bed. We got a 13th floor flat with no going up the stairs

24

to the bathroom on account of his health — but he only lived 5 months after we got it. All he got for his compensation was £3,750...I don't think that was enough for his life. To a young man I would say:

try to get a job out of it. .1

mean, my husband was just young, 59. (Interview with a Newcastle widow by Eilys Tynan)

Case three: Fire eaters asbestosis

In 1969 a retired 56-year- old army sergeant was

admitted to hospital with chest pain and fever. He was

found on subsequent follow-up to have asbestosis.

At first questions about his job exposure to asbestos revealed nothing. But a

more detailed month-by- month questioning revealed that he had worked for nine months at age l6asa fire- eater in a carnival. In doing this he had to use a lighted asbestos torch, the fire from which he inhaled and ex- haled frequently. He often had to extinguish the torch by placing it in his mouth. The doctors felt that this was 'undoubtedly sufficient exposure' to cause his asbestosis 40 years later. (Journal of the American Medical Association vol 229 1974 p.23)

Case four: Incorrect diagnosis

As you can imagine there have from time to time been

several incorrect diagnoses of asbestosis. The asbestos

industry and its apologists make much of these, but compared with the number of actual diagnoses and the many that are missed —

diagnosed as 'bronchitis', 'chestiness', 'a smoker's cough' and so on — they arei negligible.

During 1940 — a woman aged 30 helped her husband and another man build two huts with asbestos lining. The asbestos sheeting was

hand sawn inside the huts and they lived in the un- painted huts for 21/2 years. In 1957 she had an X-ray which showed shadows on both lungs: at this time she

also suffered from cough and breathlessness. No TB was found. In 1965 she was

admitted to hospital with chest pains and severe

breathlessness. She was

diagnosed as having lung

scarring and, with her history of asbestos exposure this was thought to be

asbestosis. She died in 1972, aged 61, of bleeding into the lung. No dust was found in the lung on post- mortem and it was therefore concluded that asbes-

tosis was not a cause of death. (Postgraduate Medical Journal vol 50 1974 p.250)

Rat-catching dog gets asbestos is

In 1931 a case of asbestos is was described in a dog. The dog was a rough—haired terrier that had been kept for ratting at an asbestos factory. For eight years he managed his duties quite well. But for the last two years of his life he suffered from a cough and shortness of breath. In the last six months he wasted away and his appearance 'became so distressing that he was destroyed'. Post-mortem examination showed that he died from asbestos is and that he was lucky to have lived so long, due to his escape from the 'infections which carry off the human sufferer from asbestosis' (Journal of Pathology)

By 1934 the first evidence that asbestos could cause lung cancer was available,5 but Dr Buchanan, of the Factory Inspectorate, commented in 1965,6 'We (the Factory Inspec- torate) were aware of the association of asbestosis and lung cancer some time before 1935.' So they knew before 1935 and yet the often- quoted time of this 'discovery' is 1955 — twenty years have been conveniently lost, during which time many lives could have been saved. Even though the Factory Inspectorate admitted they were aware of the danger in 1935, they did not confirm this in their annual reports until 1947. The 1955 study was by Turner Brothers' company doctor and showed that British asbestos workers had a tenfold increase in lung cancer. Over half the people who contract asbestosis eventually die of lung cancer. The risk What is your increased risk of lung cancer if you work with asbestos? Estimates vary, depending on whether the medical researchers were working for companies or trade unions (so much for 'independent research'). In this country all the studies have been done 'in close association' with the asbestos industry. In the US the trade unions have sponsored studies on the health of their members. American studies8 give the following risks:

Based on company records an asbestos worker has up to three times the chance of getting lung cancer as compared with a non-asbestos worker. Based on union records the risk may be as high as nine times that of a non-asbestos worker. An insulation worker who smokes and works with asbestos has 92 times the chance of dying from lung cancer as compared with a non- smoking, non-asbestos worker.9

5 Lancet, vol 12, 1934, p.1383. 6 Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol 132, 1965, p.507. 7 British Journal of Industrial Medicine, vol 12, 1955, p.81. 8 Journal of Occupational Medicine, vol 18, 1976. p.150. 9 Journal of the American Medical Association, vol 204, 1968, p.106.

25

Case five:- Lung cancer

26

It is difficult to determine the risk of gettin lung cancer for non-smokers who work wit asbestos, and because of this the asbestos industry information on health hazards implies there is no lung cancer risk to non-smokers. This is not true. One of the few useful studies1° of the health of 560 women at a white-asbestos-

using textile factory in the US showed up seven

lung cancer deaths. Less than one death would have been expected among this number of women not working with asbestos. Four of the women were non-smokers, two uncertain and

only one was a definite smoker.

Asbestos, smoking and lung cancer

Cancer is second only to heart disease as Britain's

biggest killer. Lung cancer kills 33,000 a year.

Most of these deaths are put down to smoking alone. We have seen above the 90-fold risk for

smoking asbestos insulation workers of getting lung cancer. There is asbestos in the air everywhere. Asbestos use has roughly paralleled increased cigarette consumption. Is asbestos plus cigarette smoking responsible for some of those 33,000 deaths? A difficult question to answer. But one recent1 1 medical paper suggests there

may be some evidence for this view. Doctors studied 201 men with confirmed lung cancer.

Fifty-eight gave a history of asbestos exposure at work. None of these men had worked in asbestos industries, had asbestosis or worked with asbestos a lot. They had just come into contact with asbestos because it is in such widespread use.

For comparison they selected 201 men matched for age etc, without lung cancer, and found that in this group only twenty-nine had such inciden-

tal exposure. They concluded, 'Asbestos-induced diseases will probably be increasingly found

among the many workers who have had inciden-

tal exposure to asbestos.'

10 'Revised Recommended Asbestos Stajidard'. covering

letter from Dr John F. Finklea, Director. US National Institute

for Occupational Safety and Health, 15 December 1976, p.9. ii British Medical Journal, 19 March 1977. p.746.

Symptoms and cure rate for lung cancer The most common symptom of lung cancer is the presence of a chest infection which fails to clear up within two or three weeks. Other possible symptoms include blood-spitting, pain, shortness of breath (Dyspnoea), general ill- health, coughing up blood (Haemoptysis), weight loss and muscle wasting. Lung cancer still remains virtually incurable. The best hope is early surgery which gives you a 1-in-5 chance of surviving five years. But only 1 in 4 cases are suitable for such surgery: in other words, 19 of 20 people diagnosed as having lung cancer die within five years of first diagnosis. In fact your chances are worse with lung cancer caused by asbestos exposure because the lungs are already damaged by the dust (asbestosis) and the type of lung cancer asbestos causes — undif- ferentiated, small-cell type — is the one with the least hope of treatment.i2 In 1968 the average age of death of asbestos workers with lung cancer was 55 years. The average age of death for men who didn't work with asbestos was 68 years. That's 13 years chopped off your life. Prevention is the only cure.

Mesotheijoma (cancer) This was once a very rare cancer, and 85 per cent of cases are related to asbestos exposure. That is why it has been called the 'asbestos cancer'. Mesothelioma is very painful and always a killer. It is a cancer of the lining (Mesothelium) of the chest or abdomen. This lining lubricates the walls of the chest and abdomen so that the lungs and intestines can move about without rubbing or friction. These cancers usually kill within two years of first diagnosis: as the cancer in the chest grows it is said to eventually kill the patient by strangling the aorta. The first symptoms are usually pain followed by breathlessness and heavy feelings in the chest. Cigarette smoking plays no part in the development of this disease.

1 2 Morgan and Seaton, Occupational Lung Dieseases, Saunders i975.

27

One day's exposure to asbestos dust is enough to get cancer.

A recent study of the out- come of treatment on 50

people with the deadly asbestos cancer —

Mesothelioma concluded, 'There is no convincing evidence that any form of treatment prolongs life...' The average time of death from first diagnosis was

six months. (Thorax, vol 33, 1978, p.26)

Mesothelioma

Exposure time

22 years Unknown 30 years 2 years 4 years

Type of exposure

Lived within 1 '/4 miles of asbestos factory. Hobby re-lining and fitting clutch and brake shoes.

Lived '/2 mile from shipyard. Husband worked in asbestos factory. Worked and lived near chicken farm made of asbestos

cement buildings. Sorije exposure to brother's overalls dusty with asbestos.

12 Quarter!)' Journal of Medicine. No.179, 1976, p.427

13 Sec reference 4, p.32

is

The interval between the first development of this disease and the original contact with asbestos may be very long — up to 40 years has been

reported. But more often it is around 20 years and can be only a few years. There is no known cure. Mesothelioma is the kiss of death,

As Professor P.C. Elmes, an expert on this disease, said in 1976,12 'The elimination of unnecessary asbestos exposure is the only reliable method of preventing Mesothelioma.'

One day's exposure to asbestos enough The frightening fact about Mesothelioma is that you can get the killer cancer from very low ex-

posures to asbestos. An exposure of one day has been Some types of exposure known to give this cancer are given below:

3 years

Source: British Journal of Industrial Medicine vol 131 1974 p.9i

28

HI, 10tiê

Asbestos dust from dirty overalls has killed workers' wives from Cancer.

These are not just isolated examples: recent medical studies'4. 15 have looked at the health of friends and relations who know asbestos workers and people who live near asbestos factories. Thirty-seven cases of asbestos cancer (Mesothelioma) have been recorded in people whose only contact with asbestos has been because a friend or relative lived in the house and was an asbestos worker. A study'4 of the household contacts (children, wives and friends) of 354 asbestos workers found that 1 in 3 of them 'had chest X-ray abnormalities... (Pleural and/or Parenchymal) characteristic of asbestos exposure.' Another study'5 of 52 female victims of Mesothelioma in New York, who died between 1967 and 1977, found that many of them had husbands or fathers who worked with asbestos or lived near an asbestos factory. The risk was estimated to be about 10 times the normal chance of contracting this killer cancer.

How common is Mesothelioma? As usual with industrial diseases this is a difficult one to answer. There is massive under-reporting 14 Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol 271, 1976, p.311. 15 Lancet, vol 1, 1978, p.1061.

29

K'Nc >V /5

Notified 'official' deaths from MesotheliOma in the UK

1951-66 200 1971 175

1967 163 1972 205 1968 233 1973 214 1969 157 1974 215 1970 180 1975 210

source: British Journal of Industrial Medicine vol 31

1974 p.91; and letter to BSSRS from Dr Greenberg 1 April 1977

30

and misdiagnosis and, it seems, some deliberate

covering u. For instance, one 1972 'authoritative study 16 in a reputable medical journal found only one attributable death among 802 deaths looked into at several US asbestos cement factories using white asbestos. Not much to worry about. But another investigation17 in 1973 found an incredible 72 cases at just one of the asbestos factories previously studied. Apparent- ly the first doctors, who were 'close' to the asbestos industry, only looked at men who were

aged 65 or over — most of the men with the killer Mesothelioma were dead by that age.

Since 1966 there has been an official register of deaths from Mesothelioma in the UK and about 200 are reported annually: So we have nearly 2,000 (1952) 'official' deaths from this killer cancer since 1951. About 15 per cent may not be due to asbestos but this leaves

us with almost 1760 painful deaths that could have been prevented. There is some evidence that this official reporting may underestimate by

16 Archipes of En virnnmental Health, vol 27, 1973, p.312.

17 Ches!,voló4, 1973,p.ó41.

oi )cIEflS AC*

Typical asbestos deaths recorded as: 'exhaustion', and 'cancer of the pancreas

as much as five times. For instance, a detailed study18 at one asbestos factory noted 19 cases of Mesothelioma, yet only four had been 'officially' reported. The Factory Inspectorate doctors who compile the register admit themselves that these figures, 'may considerably underestimate the true incidence'. Should we then multiply by five to give nearly 9,000 unnecessary deaths

Clearly, whatever figure you take, there is a massive amount of cancer that could be prevented. For the unfortunate Mesothelioma patient the incidence rate is 100 per cent, and playing with figures will not help them. The following comments19 from doctors at Birken- head shipyards in 1973 are sobering. There is a real and large increase in this tumour... Our successors will, in about 40

years' time, be seeing Mesothelioma patients who first inhaled asbestos while building post-war nuclear submarines. ..it will be some time in the 21st century before the incidence of Mesothelioma ceases to rise. Unless we stop using asbestos and treat that around us with utmost caution our view may be too optimistic.

18 British Journal of Industrial Medicine, vol 26, 1969, 19 Thorax, vol 126, 1971, p.6 p.302.

Case one: 'Wasted away to a bag of bones'

Peter Harnden worked on the assembly line at Cravens of Sheffield, the railway carriage builders, for four years from 1954 to 1959. His job was to drill through asbestos-lined panelling. He was given no protection: no ventilation, respirator or even a gau,e mask. In 1974 he went into hospital for an exploratory operation. The whole of the inside of his chest was found to be

lined with cancers. There was nothing that could be done and he was sent home to die. His widow, Joyce, commented:

It was terrible watching him slowly dying. He literally wasted away into a bag of bones. Just before he died he could hardly have weighed six stone. I wouldn't want anybody else to go through what we did. I hope the publicity about his death will

save other lives. It shows how deadly the stuff is. There could be lots of other blokes walking around with these cancers inside them, waiting to develop.

Peter Harnden died in 1975 of asbestos cancer, Mesothelioma, 20 years after his first exposure to asbestos. He was only 45 years old.

31

Case two: Floorlayer gets asbestos

cancer

In 1971 a case of the asbes-

tos cancer — Mesothelioma— was reported in a floor-layer who sanded down tiles containing asbestos. He was

44 years of age and had

been doing the job for 19

years. Measurements taken

during the sanding down of

vinyl tiles (containing 15

to 25 per cent asbestos)

showed that such workers would breathe in just over one fibre per cubic centi-

metre of air. The Govern- ment's 'safe' level is two fibres. Another 61-year-Old floor- tile installer also had signs

of asbestos lung disease

(asbestosiS). (American Review of Respiratory Diseases vol 104 1971

p.576)

Case three: Accountant gets asbestos

cancer

In 1966 a 68-year-old man

was diagnosed as having

the deadly asbestos cancer — Mesothelioma. Apart from six years in the US

army as a supervisor on concrete road construction, he had been an accountant all his life. His only contact with asbestos had been six

years previously when, as a

part-time carpenter's helper (he was retired), he worked for one month helping to insulate a house with asbestos. (Ann Arbor Reports vol 8 1966 p.l38)

32

Case four: Gas masks kill workers

Between 1939 and 1945 about 1 .600 people were

employed at a Nottingham factory making gas masks.

The filter in these gas

masks contained about 15

per cent blue asbestos, from one mine in Western Australia. Some of the workers were only employed for a few weeks or months, others worked throughout the war. Because of the known danger of asbestosis

at that time the factory took

precautions to minimise the risk from asbestos dust. Part of the assembly was conducted in an enclosed

chamber with exhaust ventilation. By 1965, at least twenty years later, the first case of Mesothelioma was noted. By 1974 there had been 26 cases, 25 of them women. Two of the workers with asbestos cancer

did not work on the assembly line — one was an

inspector and one worked in another part of the

factory. An investigation of a

similar factory in Preston

revealed a further 18 cases

of Mesothelioma. That makes 44 painful and

early deaths from cancer

caused by asbestos exposure. How many more deaths will there be? As the doctors comment: 'it should be

emphasised that MesotheliomaS have

developed in some workers after only marginal contact with this type of asbestos'.

What has happened to all those gas masks? They can still be bought in shops and

are often to be found ri attics: the 'ideal' plaything for children. Why has there been no effort to warn people and call them in?

(Inserm vol 52 1976 p.117)

Case five: Exposure at 15 death at 39

Graham Beynon left school at 15 and started work as a thermal insulator, for Bernard Hastie's of Swansea, in 1952. After three years he did his national service and then re-joined Hastie's for another eight months. In his subsequent jobs as a

postal engineer and painter and decorator his brother said that he never came into contact with asbestos. In 1976, aged 39, he died of 'acute bronchial pneumonia' caused by asbestos inhalation. The consultant pathologist, Mr O.G. Williams, said that one side of the dead man's lungs had been obliterated by a tumour growth (Mesothelioma). Graham Beynon, at the young age of 39, left a widow and two children. (South Wales Evening Echo 10 June 1976)

Case six: Asbestos cancer from the family In January 1977 a 47-year- old milkman found himself unable to work because of severe breathlessness and pain on breathing in the right side of his chest. On admission to hospital, investigation showed he had the deadly asbestos cancer — Mesothelioma. He was not told of his diagnosis, which is practically a death warrant, and in July 1977 he married for the first time. By August 1977 he had returned to hospital with

pain and breathlessness plus stomach pain, nausea, vomitting and weight loss. Nothing can be done for him and he will be lucky to survive. All the doctors can do is observe him die and try to alleviate some of the pain. He has had no personal contact with asbestos, but the rest of his family — father, mother, brother and two sisters — worked with asbestos in County Durham. His father died at the age of 37 from asbestosis and his brother suffers from chest trouble. Appar- ently his father used to bring home his dusty overalls from work. (Case notes from a London Hospital 1977)

Case seven: Asbestos cancer from dirty overalls

his doctor with a complaint of increasing pain in the right side of this chest for a year. He had worked with asbestos

industrially from 1941 to 1949: diagnosis of the deadly asbestos cancer — Mesothelioma — was made and by October 1971 he was dead. Radiation and drug therapy had little beneficial effect. In May 1972 his 52-year-old wife went to the doctor with complaints of shortness of breath and pain in the

right side of the chest for a month. The deadly asbestos cancer — Mesotheljoma — was again diagnosed and by December 1973 she was dead. Her only exposure to asbestos dust had been when she washed her husband's dirty overalls. (New England Journal of Medicine 12 September 1974 p.583)

33

In September 1970 a 49- year-old man reported to

The Workmens' Compen- sation Board of Ontario, Canada recognised laryngal cancer caused by exposure to asbestos dust as an industrial disease on the 9 May 1978. Aime Bertrand, the first person in the world to receive compensation, commented that he's happy to have won his battle but he would rather have his health. (Queen Park Report, Ontario New Democrats, 19 May 1978)

Case one: Asbestos victims in 7/162 Branch TGWU thermal insulation

1975 Name

James Allen Joseph Allen James Brown Angus Cairney Duncan Campbell Pat Carroll Joseph Cosgrove John Daly Frank Daly John Dalzeil George Dixon Kit Dorran James Duigan John Dunsmore George Gardner William Grainger John Grant Joe Gibson Pat Hanlon James Hendry Joseph Hendry

\ Additional comments

Staff 30 years Left industry 5 yrs. Left industry Off work 10 yrs. Died 1977 Staff 10 yrs. Died June 1978 Off work 15 yrs. Left industry 8 yrs. Confirmed lOyrs.

34

20 Lancet, 25 August 1973, p.416.

Other cancers caused by exposure to asbestos

Exposure to asbestos has been found to cause other cancers, mainly connected with the diges- tive system (gastrointestinal cancers). These are cancers of the stomach, colon, oesophagus, rectum and larynx. One medical study2° of 100 men with cancer of the larynx found that 31 of them had been exposed to asbestos, compared with 3 in 100 men matched for comparison.

A couple of TU branches have kept records as best they can of the health (or more often deaths) of their members from asbestos-related diseases. Below are two of the lists compiled by such branches. Largely through the efforts of John Todd, who is himself officially 10 per cent disabled with asbestosis, the branch have managed to collect the following list of sufferers and dead. The other actions of the branch to prevent asbestos murders are described elsewhere in the booklet on page 98.

Staff 10 years

Died 17 Nov. 1976. Off work 2 yrs. Died 8 Nov. 1975. Off work 10 yrs.

42 50 43 62 47 51 50 52 53 50 66 52 47 56 54 38 52 58 58 50 68

30% 20% 30% 40% 40% 30% 20% 40% 60% 30% 40% 30% 30% 20% 30% 30% 30% 20% 30% 20% 30% Foreman 20 yrs.

William Hendry 54 30% William Hendry 49 20% Frank Heron 66 30% David Laurie 49 30% Died July 1978 Tom Logie 57 30% Tom Long 68 40% Staff 26 yrs. Deceased John Magenis 34 30% Confirmed at 26 yrs. of age Joe Mullin 43 20% Tom McAslan 64 30% John McCance 36 20% David McClunie 52 20% Edw. McCartney 57 30% Sinclair McCormick 66 40% Staff 20 yrs. Duncan McIntyre 54 30% Andrew McEwan 68 30% Off work 12 yrs. Died 1977 William McLaren 56 20% Arthur Rhodie 38 30% Manager 10 yrs. Edward Rose 45 20% Duncan Ross 52 30% Left industry 15 yrs. Warner Ritchie 62 30% Tom Sloan 68 30% Off work 15 yrs. Died 1977 Edward Smith 52 30%

George Todd 55 30% John Todd 55 10%

George Thompson 52 30% Left industry 8 yrs. John Thomson 50 30% Manager Staff 20 yrs. Robert Turner 50 20% Alex Walker 66 50% Staff 30 yrs. James Ward 46 20% Left industry 15 yrs. Ron Ward law 52 40% Left industry Toby Wilson 42 20% Robert Brown 41 20% Left industry William Hurst 50 20% Left industry. Died 1977 Pat Hester 48 30% George Elder 40 20% W. Shearer 52 20% Died 1977 J. McQuade 48 30% Died 1977 J. Campbell 52 30% Foreman 20 yrs. Died 1975 Joe Dorran 55 Died 1977 Joseph Carbin 54 Died 1977 James Smith 55 30% Died 1975 J. Whitelaw 54 Sprayer. Died 1975 New cases 1976 John Boyle 47 20% JoeBrooks 62 DiedAugustlg76 Alex Belton 47 Died February 1976 James Carr 52 William Cook 46 100% Off work 6 months. Died Apr. 1976

Pleural Mesotheijoma & Asbestosis 35

Tom Don nachie Matthew Drummond William Glenn Andrew Graham George Jamieson George Kerr Harry Lockhart Jack Miller William Moffat Peter Murphy

Peter McDonald James Paisley Rob Pickthall James McDermid Rob Mcintosh

Died January 1976 Off work 6 yrs. Staff 20 yrs. Off work 5 yrs. Died March 1976 Left industry 10 yrs. Died 1977 Left industry 20 yrs. Left industry 10 yrs. Off work 5 yrs. Off work 3 yrs. Hospital 3 weeks Died 1977

Foreman 20 yrs. Died Jan. 1977 Died 1977 Died 1977

e('t

60% 30% 20% 30%

54 51

54 63

47 67

69 58 67 52

55 66

52 56 52

40% 20% 20% 20% 20%

30% 30%

30%

20% 20%

20%

20% 10%

20%

Suspects 1975, 1976 and 1977 Tom Brown

John Cassidy 52 James Campbell 55 Alex Hutton 51

James Shanks 55 Andrew Jordan 32 James Hamilton 28

William Lennox 50 Robert Thomson 54 Robert McLung 55 D. McCann 34 Mick McCrone 35

Joe Balsitas 30

JoeWilson 51

Fred Carr 52

New cases to August 1978 A. Cameron 54 Jas. Carlin 42

J.J. Fraser 65

John Hill 55 John Lockhart 57

Ian McDonald 48 James McGaughey 34 Chas. Mackelroy 47 M. McTaggart 50

William Miller 46 Andrew Ramsay 56

Pat Ward 52

36

Died 5 August 1978 Wife died cancer, July 1978

Cancer (throat). Died 1977

Off work 3 yrs.

Died August 1978 Died January 1978 Died March 1978 Died August 1978

Died August 1978

Died May 1978

Case two: Through the efforts of Tom Amey, TGWU Asbestos victims at British 9/405 Doncaster, the union has collected the Rail Engineering, following list of dead and suffering at the works Doncaster since 1953. The problems and actions over

prevention by the branch have been described elsewhere in this booklet on page 157.

List of Chest and Stomach Complaints since 1953 (Revised 1977)

Name Trade Case history Follow up Age Doctor

A. Faulkner Vehicle Carcinoma of Large Died 1955 34 builder Colon. Sec. Cancer

of Liver

A. Greasby Vehicle Lung cancer Died 1958 Late builder fifties

A. Hedley Vehicle Stomach cancer Late ? builder fifties

H. Gee Vehicle Lung cancer Late builder fifties

A. Ede Vehicle Stomach cancer Late builder sixties

R. Lyons Vehicle Bronchopneumonia, Died 58 Dr McLaughlin builder (Rt) Hemiplegia due March

to Cerebral Throm- 1963 bosis, Hypertension

H. Watson Vehicle Stroke. Angina Died 1968 38 ? builder

T. Palmer Electrician Mesothelioma Died 1971 27 ? (Inquest)

R. Cross Vehicle Lung cancer Died 1971 60 ? builder

H. Davies Vehicle Lung cancer (Inquest) Died 54 ? builder Asbestos fibres in lung July 1972

Compensation paid 1977

P. Bradley Vehicle Mesothelioma Died 43 ? builder (Inquest) Oct.1972

37

Name Trade Case Follow UP Age Doctor history

A. Saymor Vehicle Mesothelioma Died 52 Dr Sharp builder (Inquest) March 1973

H. Twyham French Lung cancer Died 1968 ? ?

polisher

E. Lumby Vehicle Asbestosis Ill-health 61 Dr Walker

builder retirement

J. Thompson Vehicle Chest trouble Ill-health 62 ?

builder retirement 1972

J. Patrick Vehicle Chest trouble Ill-health 52 Dr Sharp

builder retirement 1973

R. Knowles Vehicle Stroke followed by Died 1973 68

builder cancer of the throat

N. Slack Chargeman Chest trouble 11)-health 62 Dr Walker

Labourer retirement 1973

J. Robinson Vehicle Asbestosis Due to retire builder ill-health 62

ft Brett Vehicle Stroke, Hypertension In Tickhill 44 Dr Scott

builder Cerebral infraction, Hospital Coronary Died thrombosis Sept.1976

A. Ross Vehicle Cerebral thrombosis Died 50 Dr Walker

builder Intestinal cagoted Sept.1975 artery thrombosis Arterio sclerosis

T. Andrews Vehicle Coronary thrombosis Died 51 Dr McGaw

builder Coronary atheroma June 1974

E. Parker Vehicle Chronic airways Died 1974 53 Dr Eminsori

builder obstruction, Congestive cardiac failure

J. Williams Vehicle Chest trouble Ill-health 64 ?

builder retirement

E. Collins Vehicle Chest trouble Frequently 53 ?

builder 1st. X-ray off work unsatisfactory

38

S. Stray Vehicle Chest trouble Frequently 53 builder 1st. X-ray off work

unsatisfactory

T. Cutts Vehicle Chest trouble Frequently 40 builder 1st. X-ray off work

unsatisfactory

C. Flinders Vehicle Chest trouble Frequently 65 builder off work

retired 1974

T. Amey Vehicle Claim in for At work 50 Dr Walker builder asbestosis

W. Dudley Sheet Metal Stroke, Hypertension Off work 52 worker Vertigo

C. Bailey Vehicle Hypertension and Frequently 55 builder Vertigo off work

P. Bedford Vehicle Cancer of the stomach Died 1975 40 builder

C. Smalley Fitter Lung cancer, Heart Died 1974 60 cavity, Mesothelioma (Inquest)

A. Rowley Vehicle Cancer of lung, Died 1975 71 builder stomach, sec. liver,

kidney

B. Gal let Vehicle Cachena cancer of Died 1975 69 Dr McLaughlin builder throat, lung

R. Joy Vehicle Coronary Died 55 builder thrombosis Sept. 1976

E. Evans Boiler- Mesothelioma Died 66 Dr McGaw maker (Inquest) 15 Oct.

1976

F. Lumby Vehicle Mesothelioma Died 59 ? builder (Inquest) 23 May

1977

N. Womack Planner Mesothelioma Died El. Fitter March 1977

39

Name Trade Case Follow up Age Doctor history

W. Everingham Storeman Mesothelioma Died 60 ?

June 1977

A. Hoidridge Vehicle Asbestosis Died 60 Dr Mclllraith builder June 1977

L. Dyer Trimmer Lung removed Ill-health 57 Dr McGaw 7.3.77 retirement

1977

F. Painton Fitter Asbestosis Ill-health 55 ?

retirement 1977

L. Warrin Fitter Asbestosis Ill-health ? ?

retirement 1977

V. Hughsman Labourer Asbestosis Ill-health 61 ?

retirement 1977

Wilson Work study Claim in for At work 56 ? Ex. fitter Asbestosis

? Labourer Claim in for At work 60 ? Ex. lagger Asbestosis

Ford Vehicle Claim in for At work 57 ? builder Asbestosis

Pell Vehicle Claim in for At work 61 ? builder Asbestosis S.Y.PT.

Mason Vehicle Three strokes Retired 69 Dr Scott builder Vertigo. Hypertension

Chambers Vehicle Hypertension, At work 56 ?

builder Vertigo

Walker Vehicle Hypertension, At work 57 ' builder Vertigo

Bowling Vehicle Hypertension, At work 54 ? builder Vertigo

Weil Electrician Asbestosis At work 57 ?

Bryan Boiler Asbestosis Died 1975 78 ?

40 attendant

Health checks for people exposed to asbestos These are often used against people, especially those exposed in environmental situations. This is because asbestos diseases take at least 10 years to show up on current medical examinations, more often 20 years for the full effects, and sometimes 40 years in the case of the deadly asbestos cancer — Mesotheijoma.

On top of this there is the usual attempt in investigations into industrial health to prove 'personal susceptibility' of individual workers. Recent studies2' have, for the moment, found that it is not possible to 'screen out' workers 'susceptible' to asbestosis. This approach is totally company-oriented and completely against good trade union practice, which has recently been re-stated in the TUC evidence to the Government's Advisory Committee on Asbestos:

The TUC is aware that certain individuals may be more susceptible tø cancer from asbestos exposure than others. However, the TUC is totally opposed to the proposal that workers be discriminated against on the grounds that they are or are not susceptible to certain hazards. Workplaces should be made safe for all workers.

Bearing the above comments in mind, screening tests can be of use to a workforce provided they are conducted by doctors outside the company, by agreement with the shop-floor trade unionists, there is full disclosure of the results, and no victimisation. While it is true that there is no cure for any of the diseases caused by asbestos at the current time, organised medical checks on the workforce can give an idea of the incidence of asbestos disease and whether improvements are taking place. And, of course, there is a slim chance that somethin might be done for some victims in a few years time.

21 British Medical Journal, 5 March 1977, p.603.

41

42

A typical programme would include:

1 Work or occupational history: to include

questions on past and present jobs, smoking history, symptoms, and so on. The more information you can give, the better. 2 Physical examination: a general physical examination to be given, with emphasis on your lungs. 3 Chest X-ray: a photograph of your chest

using X-ray radiation shows up your bones, heart and other chest structures. It also shows

up lung cancer, lung scarring (asbestosis) and the effects of smoking on your lungs. But you can easily have physical symptoms (a shortness of breath for example) with little change on

rays. 4 Lung function tests: in these tests you blow as hard as you can into a tube that is connected to a device that measures the amount of air you can blow out of your lungs and the rate at which

you can do it. Different rates and volumes occur if you have lung damage. 5 Sputum Cytology: this is an examination of your sputum (normally three samples) for cancer cells. It is useful for picking up cancer of the bronchus before it shows up on X-rays.

No test involves giving blood except the screening for 'susceptible worker' tests, which should not be allowed. None of these tests are 100 per cent accurate and all, to some extent, rely on each other for final diagnosis. X-rays, for instance, can be read in several ways, depending on the 'sympathy' of the X-ray reader. Hence the need for doctors from outside the company. It must be re-emphasised that medical checks for asbestos workers should never be used as a replacement for a ban or strict working procedures. Professor I.J. Selikoff, a world-famous expert on asbestos disease, and his team of doctors tried to help22 one branch of New York insulation workers when they contracted asbestos diseases during the period 1963 to 1974. The results of all this expert medical attention were: 57 out of 59 cases of lung cancer died; 31 out of 31 cases of Mesothelioma died. Depressing figures for the medical profession: figures which emphasise the importance of prevention; and this is where the trade unions can play a major part.

43

Doing a lung function test: give a hard but steady long blow The equip __________ ment used to measure 22 Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol 127, lung function.(QCAW) 1976, p.448.

Chapter 3 Excuses, excuses...

A recent government study of 100 deaths in the construction industry found that 8 were caused

by falls through roofs or

ceilings. 5 of these deaths occurred from asbestos

roofs. As the report commented: 'Asbestos kills in more ways than

one, but those who fall

through asbestos cement roofs are "picked-off" one at a time and cause no

public outcry.' ('One Hundred Fatal Accidents in Construction', HSE, HMSO, 1978)

In reply to the revelations about the dangers of asbestos, the asbestos industry has put out hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of publicity about how the dangers are 'not so bad as they're made out to be'. In this way, the industry has allayed the fears of a lot of people. But just how much substance lies behind this smokescreen?

44

I

Asbestos cement is a special case Without doubt the major use of asbestos in most countries is in the manufacture of asbestos cement products. This includes corrugated and flat sheeting and asbestos cement pipes for sewerage and drainage. In general the asbestos acts to reinforce the cement protect from fire, heat, cold, condensation, corrosion and friction. In the form of asbestos cement, asbestos is around us everywhere. For this reason the asbestos cement industry has, at the recent government hearings and elsewhere, tried to make a special case for asbestos cement, arguing that its products are 'safer' than other forms of asbestos. In the words of Mr R.K. Day, Chairman of the UK Asbestos Cement Manufacturers Association, 'We quite accept that there is a very much greater health risk from the non-cement asbestos products.' This is something the makers of these other asbestos products will not admit. The industry argues that any health risk from asbestos cement products is small because: a asbestos cement contains only 10 per cent asbestos; b the fibre is mostly white asbestos; c the manufacturing process is almost wholly wet; d the asbestos fibres are encapsulated or chemically bonded into the cement.

To take these points in order: a The fact that asbestos cement contains only 10 per cent asbestos does not make it any safer. This amount of asbestos in any product is clearly capable of generating asbestos dust. b There is a large quantity of evidence on the danger of white asbestos, which the industry ignores. c The process may be wet, but by Mr Day's own evidence to the British Government's Advisory Committee on Asbestos in June 1977, the dust levels in:

88 per cent of asbestos cement factories are below 1 fibre per ml; 96 per cent are below 2 fibres per ml; 70 to 80 per cent are below 0.5 fibres per ml.

45

46

The US recommended level is 0.1 fibres per ml

and even this is not considered a safe level — just a measurable one. It is no surprise that Mr Day said at the hearings: 'We do not support, how-

ever, the recommendation that the present standard should be more stringent.' According to evidence presented to the same hearings by Julian Peto, of Oxford University, the present 'safe' standard may allow 1 in 10 workers to contract asbestos-related diseases. d As for the 'encapsulation theory', even the

expert that the asbestos cement factory Eternit

brought to these government hearings, Professor A. Deruyttere of Louvain University, could only comment: 'From our study we cannot say whether asbestos cement dust is dangerous or not.' Furthermore, that same expert saw fit at the hearings to contradict the company evidence

(apparently supported by a letter from Professor

I.J. Selikoff in the United States) as regards the

safety (or 'encapsulation') of asbestos sheet that has 'weathered'. He thought 'it should be investi-

gated'. Against all this it is sobering to realise that at one asbestos cement plant in the US, where white asbestos was mainly in use, 72 cases of the

deadly asbestos cancer — Mesothelioma — had

been observed up to 1973.'

I Chest, vol 64, 1973, p.641.

1:iE: ThENP...

Skandjnavska Eternjt. (Bo Sundstrom, Stenbergs Bilder, Sweden)

Major Swedish asbestos cement firm closes In 1972 Sweden imported about 15,000 tons of processed asbestos products; most of which were in the form of asbestos cement products. New regulations regarding the use of asbestos were introduced in June 1975. A special section dealing with asbestos cement commented: In asbestos cement products the asbestos is bound to cement. How- ever, all fibres are not bound, and during mechanical handling and processing, asbestos- laden dust is released into the air.., It has

As from 1 July 1976 there was a ban on the working of asbestos cement products in Sweden, with certain exemptions until the end of 1977. Under industry pressure, this ban was lifted for 'asbestos cement pipes of a certain type' in 1976. Special working methods were to be used, high velocity cutting of pipes is prohibited and all efforts to develop alternative substitutes are encouraged. Even so, Skandinaviska Eternit AB, the largest Swedish asbestos cement factory, closed down in the middle of 1977 owing to the ban on asbestos cement products.

therefore been decided to classify all asbestos cement products as dust- containing materials.

(Swedish Board of Industrial Safety Directives No.52 issued June 1975)

47

48

'It's only white asbestos'

That is the myth peddled by the asbestos industry over the past fifteen years. After ignoring the deaths and suffering caused by asbestos for sixty years, the asbestos industry woke up in 1960 and began producing its own independent research. In the forty years before 1960 the asbestos

industry produced about ten medical and scientific papers on the health hazards of its products. In the eighteen years since, in the UK alone, it has churned out nearly seventy. Management scientists, as most are, have argued along four main lines: 1 The health hazards of asbestos are minimal and limited to heavily-exposed workers from

many years ago. This is nonsense, as we have shown. 2 Trace oils from the vegetation or storage sacks, cause the cancers. This has been disproved with a lot of effort from academic and government scientists. 3 Trace metals contaminating the asbestos cause the cancers. Again, disproved with a lot of academic and government scientific efforts. 4 Only 'blue' asbestos is really dangerous. This 'fact' has had a lot of success in the UK, although

,$F0 41

Case one: White asbestos is good enough for you and me; not for the House of Commons though! White asbestos may be al- right for most of Britain's population, but not for our 635 MPs it seems. In the summer of 1978 they were getting the 'safe' white asbestos (used as insulation in ventilation ducts) re- p/aced with an asbestos-free material. By chance some blue asbestos was found while this was being done. Panic! Now the roof has been sealed by fully protected workmen, regular testing will be carried out to ensure no contamination of the air, and at some future time a 'major operation' will be carried out to remove it. Again, sealing is often good enough for the rest of us, they get removal. Who says MPs have no privileges? ('Asbestos found in Commons Chambers' Guardian 16 September 1978)

less elsewhere, and thus needs some looking at in detail. The early detection work in South Africa in 1960, that definitely linked asbestos exposure with the previously very rare, painful and fatal cancer Mesothelioma, did find that these cancers occurred more often in workers exposed to blue rather than white asbestos. A lot of effort went into pushing this line. One of the first champions of the 'blue is deadly, white is safe' view was Dr Smithers of Cape Asbestos in 1963. By 1968 it had become official dogma:

The Advisory Panel considers that the evidence to date on balance indicates a particular significance must be given to Crocidolite (blue) as the cause of Meso- theliomas (asbestos cancers). The Panel recommends that other types of fibre should be substituted for Crocidolite where- ever possible.. . (Problems Arising from the Use of Asbestos, Memorandum of the Senior Medical Inspector's Advisory Panel HMSO 1968). It seems that on the basis of this recommen-

dation the 1969 Asbestos Regulations set a level of blue asbestos allowed in the air so 'ow as to effectively ban it at that time. By 1970 the asbestos manufacturers had agreed on a voluntary ban on the import of blue asbestos into the UK. In 1976 the asbestos industry's latest glossy hand-out said:

Many experts believe that Mesothelioma (asbestos cancer) has been caused primarily by the unguarded use of 'blue' asbestos rather than by 'white' asbestos which accounts for 95 per cent of world production. British manufacturers have imposed a voluntary ban on the import of blue fibre since 1970. ('Asbestos' miracle fibre or killer dust?', Asbestos Information Committee 1976).

Yet in Cape's annual report in 1976 we read: 'Production of blue asbestos is now running higher than ever.' Somebody is getting it wrong somewhere. Denmark, the Netherlands, Finland and Sweden took their standards from the UK and set lower levels for blue, but many more do not differentiate between the many types of asbestos and consider all equally dangerous.

49

'S

to

otU'I

50

These are West Germany, East Germany, Italy, France, USA, USSR, Canada, South Africa and

Norway. The most recent and comprehensive standard has come from the USA, where the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in December 1976 reported:

The general conclusion of this study (on the health effects of exposure to asbestos) is that all forms of asbestos, both commercial and non-commercial, are carcinogenic (cause cancer).. .only a ban on its use can ensure complete protection against this mineral's carcinogenic effect. (Letter from Dr J.F. Finklea, Director of NIOSH, to Dr Morton Corn, US Depart- ment of Labour, 15 December 1976).

Such statements have received backing from the US asbestos industry. For instance, Dr Paul

Kotin, who is responsible for health and safety for Johns-Manville, the biggest US asbestos com-

pany, said in November 1976: I know of the explanations offered in

support of the concept of an increased hazard with Crocidolite (blue asbestos), but I would respond by saying that valid alternative explanations do exist. It is common knowledge that asbestosis, lung cancer and Mesothelioma can occur follow-

ing excessive exposure to Chrysotile (white) and Amosite (brown) as well as to Crocidolite (blue). S

t:"°°3' 5U(O ';;, 1." to

o ar

A recent authoratjve study by Julian Peto

(Lancet, 4 March 1978, p.484) on workers from Turner and Newall in the UK concluded, 'Peritoneal Mesotheijoma (cancer of the lining of the stomach) is usually due to Croci- dolite (blue asbestos), but exposure to Chrysotile (white asbestos) alone may lead to a substantial risk of pleural Mesotheli- oma (cancer of the lining of the lung).' Cancer of the lining of the lung is by far the most common; accounting for some 80 per cent of all cases of this deadly asbestos cancer.

I am sure that Dr Selikoff would be willing to affirm his position that the hazards of Crocidolite (blue), Amosite (brown) and Chrysotile (white) are comparable (Letter to Dr P. Loubert, Toronto, 5 November 1976).

The UK asbestos industry has had a good run for its money with the myth that only blue asbestos is dangerous. It has fooled the Govern- ment, academic scientists and, more important, many workers and other people exposed to white asbestos. But this is no joke. In putting up this deliberate and cynical smokescreen regarding the health hazards of white asbestos they have endangered the lives of many thousands of people. They are in effect guilty of murder and the management and directors of these 'responsible' asbestos companies, and the doctors and scientists who have supplied bogus and bent information on the hazards should be imprisoned for this act.

51

NOW f7 k/I1/7R

WH17!

52

'Asbestos is indispensable' Many people who would otherwise have

perished in fires or on the roads are alive

today because of asbestos. ('Asbestos: miracle fibre or killer dust?' Asbestos Information Committee 1976).

What is the implication? That the only choice we have is frying alive or dying more slowly from asbestos diseases? In fact at the recent Government Advisory Committee hearings on asbestos the industry suggested that civilisation

might collapse without asbestos. Leaving aside the fact that 'civilisation' has only had the benefits and horrors of asbestos for the past seventy years or so, this ignores the fact that most of the tonnage of asbestos has nothing to do with fire protection or friction materials and that we have plenty of replacements for most uses of asbestos. Nobody doubts the need for effective fire control: the annual loss of life and property testifies to that need. Clearly a major factor in fire prevention and control until the fire brigade arrives is the specification of fireproof materials in construction, furnishings and fittings. As regards the use of asbestos for fireproof ing it is straightforward: asbestos is a health hazard, there are replacements for it, with fewer health risks, for nearly all uses, and therefore these should be used. But there is also a more serious

problem with asbestos. Because of the asbestos industry's oversell of its wonder fireproofer, it has in fact been indirectly responsible for deaths in fires.

50 people lost their lives in the Summerland disaster. (Manx Press Pictures)

Case one: The 1973 Summerland fire In August 1973 the Summer- land pleasure complex on the Isle of Man caught fire and resulted ri the death of 50 people, the worst peacetime fire in the UK since 1929. The toll could have been much greater if the fire had broken out a little later, when it was dark, and many more people would have been in the building. Fire damage to the two- year-old building was estimated at £1,267,000. What caused the fire? And why did it spread so quickly? These and other questions were asked at the official enquiry. ('Report of the Summerland Fire Commission', Isle of Man 1974) The evidence below comes from this report. On the evening of 2 August 1973, three Liverpool schoolboys set fire to a disused kiosk near the Summerland pleasure complex. Within minutes the burning kiosk collapsed against one wall of the building. This should not have caused any problems, since according to the Isle of Man By-law 39, the external walls of any building shall be non-combustible throughout and have a fire resistance of two hours. In the original design of 1967 the wall against which the burning kiosk collapsed was to be made of re-

inforced concrete. But in 1968, 'in the interest of cost' (how often does this go down as a fire hazard?) a

cheaper corrugated steel sheet under the patent name 'Galbestos' was used. Galbestos is zinc-coated steel sheeting with a protective layer of asbestos felt-bonded to it. The official enquiry concluded:

We have formed the view that the use of Galbestos in the wall of this building was an error of judgement... the contribution of the combustible components of Galbestos accelerated the growth of the fire in the early stages.

It is clear from the official report that the architects thought that any product with a name sounding like asbestos and containing the 'wonder' fibre would not burn. The enquiry also found that the asbestos

applied as fireproofing on the complex's iron girders was 'by no means completely effective at the time of the fire'.

Case two: Asbestos sheets cause fire deaths

Perhaps other investigations might reveal the part played by poor design and cost-

cutting in the start and spread of fires. For instance, a recent investigation into the cause of the death by fire of 11 men in a H umber- side County Council old

people's home on 5 January 1977 concluded:

The fire was started by a blow-torch passing through a gap or crack in an asbestos cement ceiling. The contractor specified 'asbestos sheets', and the asbestos cement, rather than originally specified quarter-inch asbestolux, gave the impression that it was fire resistant and there was no reason for the heating engineer to suppose it was not (Guardian 21 October 1977).

It seems that in these few investigated fires asbestos

actually helped the fire. Add to this the comment of Dr E.W. Marchant, Department of Fire and Safety Engineer- ing, Edinburgh University:

Asbestos could be designed out of a build-

53

ing as other more tradi- tional constructional materials could be re-

placed in appropriate locations and thereby removing the need for the afterthought material to be used in fire divisions. Letter to BSSRS 1977)

Is there really a need for asbestos in fire protection in view of its known health hazard' Clearly not

Case three: Asbestos load catches fire

On 11 July 1977 a lorry carrying plastic sacks of asbestos frorii Manchester Docks to Cape's Uxbridge factory in West London burst into flames on the M6 motorway at Great Barr, Birmingham. The deadly dust was seen to blow all around. Firemen did not know how to deal

with 'burning asbestos', so a

team of 'trouble-shooters' were called in from Cape. Wearing protective clothing, masks and oxygen equipment, they sprayed the fire and beat it with sticks for twelve hours before the danger had passed. The asbestos was then put into sealed containers and taken to a dump at Nuneaton. Apart from the Birmingham Post, Birmingham Mail and

Socialist Worker, no news-

paper reported this accident. Manchester is the main port for asbestos imports — 54,000 tons in 1975 out of a total for the UK of 139,000 tons. Do none of the plastic bags split? When will the next 'accident' be? How many people living near Great Barr or passing in cars were given a 'dose' of asbestos? Nobody knows and nobody cares, it seems. In the words of the local fire brigade spokesman at the time: 'There is no

danger to the public as long as the asbestos dust is not breathed in.' But he forgot to tell people to hold their breath for twelve hours.

54

Case four: Firemen ban asbestos

Fire-fighting is a dangerous

job at the best of times. On

top of the obvious physical hazards of the job, the in-

creasingly toxic fumes of many fires take their toll of a fireman's health, Added to this they face the less

obvious health hazards of the dust they breathe when

Fighting an asbestos fire'! (Birmingham Post and Mail)

fighting a fire. There are not many buildings that have not been fire-insulated with asbestos in one way or another; thermal or acoustic insulation, limpet asbestos for protection or decoration of steelwork or ceilings, and soon. In a fire-damaged building the asbestos will be more dusty.' Since 1970 it has been known that asbestos 'protective' garm- ents can give high and

dangerous levels of asbestos

to the wearer. Asbestos anti- flash fire helmets were withdrawn from the London Fire Brigade in 1974. During 1976 the Greater London Council Scientific Branch tested various gloves and fire blankets as possible replacements for asbestos. In many cases they found asbestos actually inferior to the new less hazardous materials (Nomex, glass fibre, heat-resistant leather). Heat-resistant leather lined

gloves and Nomex fire blankets performed best in the tests and were recommended. ('Firemen freeze out Asbestos', New Scientist 30 September 1976 p.675; 'Performance of Fire Blanket Materials', Fire Research Station Report No.1079 January 1978)

Heat resisting 'Nomex' gloves are superior in heat resistance and more comfortable, ott top of being safer, than asbestos equivalents. (Suppliers of non.ashestog gloves and fire blankets are: (1) Tutor Safety Products, Sentiok Works, Sturmin step Newton, Dorset DTIO IBZ, 0258 7291. (2) Safety Equipment Centres, Elm Road, New Maiden, Surrey, 01-9429557)

55

(Anna/s of Occupational Hygiene vol 121970 p.77)

56

Brakes are dangerous When you look at the number of road accidents each year (in 1975 there were 6,600 killed and nearly 334,000 injured, an increase over the previous year of nearly 5 per cent), you might well wonder whether the claims of the asbestos

industry to save lives and injury on the roads is not a sick joke. Asbestos brake shoes were first introduced around 1910. It might be argued that they contributed to the subsequent massacre on the roads. It is clear that the ability of engine designers has far outstripped the ability of brake designers to stop the monsters. More importantly, one look at the health hazards of brake shoes, discs and clutches, to both producers and the public, shows there is an urgent need for a re-think. In terms of accidents and health hazards private transport is the main culprit and should be dealt with first. For necessary personal transport and for the braking systems of public service vehicles alternative friction materials will be required in the short term. Such materials are already used in racing cars and in aeroplane braking systems. Dunlop have recently invented metallic-type friction brake pads that perform better than asbestos in the wet on motorbikes. The major US friction asbestos producer — Raybestos

— sees itself getting out of asbestos in the next few

years. This is not a technical problem but an economic and political one. Since all of the current braking systems produce dust, and no dust is good for your lungs, new non-dust brak-

ing systems require developing (see also p.l54).

A calendar from the early 1950's put out by the AsbestosMarketingCo Ltd, London, to push the killer dust.

Chapter 4 Your protectors

In response to the various diseases caused by asbestos — some of which have been known for seventy years — various 'responsible' organisations have taken over the role of protectors over those exposed to asbestos. Just how effective are they — or do they want to be?

The asbestos industry In 1878 Samuel Turner of Rochdale was experi- menting, with little success, on using various cotton fabrics for pump and boiler packings. Newly developed mobile steam engines were demanding better sealing and lagging. With the discovery of the Canadian asbestos deposits in 1876 he quickly saw the possibilities and by 1879 he had spun ten tons of asbestos to fulfil a contract. The report of the Monopolies Com- mission1 in 1973 commented that the history of the asbestos industry before 1945 was, 'In effect the history of Turner and Newalls (which grew from Samuel Turner), and to some extent it has remained so today.' Today the asbestos industry is said to employ directly some 20,000 people and to be worth £200 million. In addition to Turner and Newall the other two major UK asbestos companies are Cape Industries (until

1 'Asbestos and Certain Asbestos Products', Monopolies Commission, HMSO, 1973.

57

58

the early seventies 'Cape Asbestos') and British

Belting Asbestos (BBA). These three major British asbestos companies were the ones whose

representatives sat on — or more correctly controlled — the 1931 British Government committee on the 'Methods for the Suppressing of Dust in Asbestos Textile Factories'. This was set up in response to the revelations of the epidemic of asbestos disease found in the asbestos industry in 1930 (see p.ó4). No longer could the asbestos industry ignore the hazards of its products, so it sought to limit the Government. regulations and to control their application. The regulations only applied to asbestos textile factories. General recommendations were made for ventilation to remove the asbestos dust, but no method was given — apart from a very out-of-date and inaccurate one — for checking the effectiveness of this ventilation. In fact it seems that the asbestos industry did not record dust levels until the 1950s, twenty years later. Not that all this mattered much. There were only two prosecutions under the 1931 Asbestos Regulations. The only one we know anything about is the case of Central Asbestos.2 No doubt the conditions described were fairly typical (see also the story of Hebden Bridge on

p.8).

2 Peter Giliman and Anthony Woolf, 'The Dangerous Dust', Sunday Times Magazine. 2 April 1972.

Central Asbestos Bob Smith, who worked for the company from 1958 to 1966 (note the dates), had the job of pouring hundredweight sacks of South African asbestos into a mill to be ground, and then packing this ground fibre into bags. He commented:

It was dusty work. We were half-blinded by the dust when the bags burst...! wore a mask but because I had a narrow face the dust used to get in from the top even though I tightened it up.

Dust tests done by the Factory Inspectorate in 1961 showed dust levels between 170 and 680, the then allowed and so-called 'safe' level. In 1964 Central Asbestos was fined £170, plus 50p costs (10 shillings in those days), for continuous breaches of the 1931 Asbestos Regulations. This shows how toothless were these regulations, their enforcement and the penalties prescribed. In July 1970 Bob Smith was awarded £16,388 personal injuries damages against Central Asbestos for his asbestosis. A total of £86,469 was paid to seven men by the company's insurers. As Mrs Smith said: 'I know we got £16,000. But that's £16,000 for a man's life.' The story of Hebden Bridge shows that this was no isolated case. Many other workers testify that negligence was common. What was the asbestos industry's response to the revelations at Hebden Bridge? Did they suggest better control of the dust? Perhaps a safer dust level? Maybe more compensation? More efforts to find safer substitutes? No! The response was a full-blooded £500,000 public relations campaign on the 'unwarranted, biased and inaccurate' comments on the industry.

One of the major features of this campaign to convince us that asbestos is good for us has been full-page advertisements in all the national newspapers. Some of the headings were:

20 SENSIBLE QUESTIONS YOU ASKED ABOUT ASBESTOS AND HEALTH AND THE ANSWERS 'WHERE WOULD I FIND ASBESTOS IN MY HOME?'

59

fiji. Bob Smith (Sunday Times)

If damaged or to be worked telephone

or 01-633 6313

The warning label used to draw attention to the hazardous nature of asbestos by the Greater London CounciL

60

Even the Advertising Standards Authority — not the most critical authority in the world — found that in the first series of advertisements (in July 1976), 'much of the information given in the advert was premature and unsubstantiated.' One paper3 even went as far as to write a detailed criticism of the advert, but the criticism was about one quarter the size of the original which appeared on another page. Money doesn't speak, it swears!

In 1975-76 the Asbestos Research Council, an asbestos company organisation set up in 1957 to look at every aspect of asbestos disease prevention, had a budget of £87,000; less than one- fifth of what its sister organisation, the AIC, has to advertise the non-dangers of asbestos. The £500,000 publicity campaign seems to have worked:

Surveys prior to the advertising campaign showed that about one-fifth of the UK

population thought asbestos should be banned. Several weeks after the last adver- tisement a survey indicated this number was halved.4

More than 12,500 people wrote or phoned in asking for information and all of them were answered. Some of these were local government officials and architects whose only source of information was the asbestos industry. A more insidious influence exercised by the asbestos industry and its innocent — (or even 'official'-) sounding front organisations such as the Asbestos Information Committee and Asbestos Research Council, is the fact that they generate nearly all the information on asbestos.

For instance, the following comments come from several professional articles. It is clear that the authors have used asbestos industry hand-

3 Oliver Guile, Misleading claims in ashestos advert',

Sunday Times, 4 July 1976.

4 International Management, March 1977.

'WE NEED ASBESTOS. THIS IS WHAT THE ASBESTOS INDUSTRY HAS BEEN DOING TO MAKE IT SAFE'

14.

When the warning is on asbestos products it will

often look like this one. This is on corrugated roofing sheets at Ealing Broadway Tube in 1978.

(Andrew Wiard, Report)

"Where would I find Asbestos in my home?" and other questions you have asked about Asbestos and health.

1 Wb.r.w,ntd I find Anba.te. mary ha.,.? £ Tise:orn..ke vnooieutiousesofasoyntosace unsung board stands oveo door seem srrnrsenng pads, ir.uuiation ooaud aiio riecrrrn e:erneor sup- portSrn domestic appliances.

ftna,so edo toe buildingmstenalscfsome garages and sheds, and in ysur carS brake and slut chdninns Urtl quttetecently 1 was often used to lag tanks arid ppca

Ta help you identify aslcstcs mare eacly, by the end of the year trout asbestos pesduc-s you nan cup scoops m.d be clearly i000lled oiito a spenial asbestos s/nobel aod sovice about handling theor. ) What t th•Aab I.. aryqmge coat? Q This is asbestos cement sheeting, used for ifs durability and free resstaooe. And If Ir weatcer- proof

The anbesrss fibre is asked info he cesneet eard ir completely sale. unless released into the err hya pew at saw or drill

Asbesf os cement sheeting is the most com- mas use fee asbestos tAre The shents en your garage, like the streets on factory and loom build- mgn are senes-eighrhs cemesr sod one-eighto asbestos retrforcemyof ) Shaatd Ig.t aid at Aabe.ta. pcodtaat. Ut ary 5) hoar.?

NmThenare there to protect you Asbestos preduots are patIently harmless

unless wars or damaged or sohes they ace being atfetfeioetycut, untied orsanded A What do Ida if I that daana.d Ashanta. '±In0000baaaha.,yka,a.. - mid mukedroliaadanoe.

Mesatheloina anonuotnforyl4'- stall oa000r esposed, he has to keep his own rues clothing deaths in iso money hut nor 005umed mote separate from work olothog and wear overalls nnmmordo thas rhis among asbestos markers, at work parncuiaoty those who were heavhy eoposed a she ooesaba must be iauodeied at toe place blue asbestos fibre is the past But blue fibre has

wtrerehaworbaorbyasuirablyequippeolauo not been impaned aieoe idly They must ear be fakes hame Iris imponact to remember that mast ashes- Goverawest regulasasa require this to safe- ms-related diseases are the resu.t of high cape- guard asbestos workers aed thea families suse to dusty induststai conditions which are now Ar, d.oIilio ad biding wasco, - 15 aa..e.d byth. pennant Rob..,.. angel.- o Ar. S0t p..pl. mar. pro.. 5a Rob..t,. Si.,.? o dl..... than eth.n? Yes These regu.050ns were created spend- Yes As with ad diseases, some people are rally to protect all workers who may be b.andliog no p bi

dy ffsr fe 'st sort b lu g be ras psd 5 rod dust as enuble, you should net Sock wrth asbesr as pta- ffpouaeeademolifiosorbuildiogworkez ducts where dust wght be created ysu dish the regsiasoos are stat beasg sbserv.of. 9atthomA.boasj_

INWRABLE r

dam CHEfl treemgrag I Itd COMPLAINTS t P0

brakes, yoo can lisd our more obouf osduces by fuliag in the coupos below tog if to the Asbestos fnfsrmatioo Cam

61

62

outs (readily available) for almost all their sources: The Architect's Journal 1 December 1976 (in an article entitled 'Asbestos and alternative materials') commented: 'It is quite likely that many products containing asbestos can continue to be used with little or no risk to health.'

Chartered Mechanical Engineer April 1977, 'Asbestos — a versatile material', wrote: 'Over the last five years, there has been considerable comment on the health aspects of using asbestos and materials incorporating asbestos. Much of this has been ill-informed, often of a con-

jectural nature, and has given rise to anxiety, particularly from the public, who are often the end users, either in the home or in their vehicles.'

The Architect April 1977, 'Do we still need asbestos?': 'The scientific research can be safely left to the asbestos companies, who are working non-stop towards improvements. . . the economic argument for using asbestos is a strong one.'

Engineering Materials and Design June 1977, 'Asbestos — a new appraisal': 'The position has been clearly over-dramatised -. . fears have largely stemmed from sensational news features.'

And so on. When you get away from the 'professional' journals things get even worse. Thus readers of Women's Own were treated to a review of the non-health hazards of asbestos in an article during 1976 by Dr Smither — Cape's own medical officer.

There is no doubt that in its search for profit the asbestos industry has done a good job of cover-

ing up and minimising the health hazards of its

products. Are these the actions of a responsible industry?

South Africa: Asbestos Mines

At a 1969 conference on asbestos, Dr R.SJ. Toit, of the South African Department of Mines, was talking of 'disappointingly high' levels of asbestos dust in the mines. By August 1977 he was claiming that 'conditions in the asbestos mines of South Africa are under effective

Conditions in asbestos mines in 1949 were described by a US doctor, G.W.H. Schepers5

During 1949 I made the first official governmental radiological and clinical survey of the asbestos industry in the North East- ern Transvaal. At that time, industrial hygiene in one of these mines and asbestos workswas simply deplorable. Exposures were crude and unchecked. I found young children, completely included within large shipping bags, trampling down fluffy Amosite asbestos, which all day came cascad-

ing over a hefty whip. I believe these children to have the ultimate dust exposure. X-rays revealed several to have radiological asbestosis with Corpulmonale (failure of the right side of the heart) before the age of 12. Why Dr Sluis-Cremer did not see them 10 years later is fairly evident. There was probably not one of them still alive... To gain a true perspective he should have seen those mines in 1949. In the valley where the mill was located asbestos dust rolled through like the morning mist, and I had a hard time keeping my staff in working trim because of itching skins caused by asbestos adhering to our clothes. Even the food at the local hotel was gritty with dust.

control'.6 But figures he released of dust analysis done by his department as late as 1976 showed that the dust level in the mines varied from 1 to 9 fibres per ml (over 4 times the safe level allowed in the UK — see p.119). As the Annual Report of the South African Government Department of Mines for 1973 commented: 'Current concentrations (of asbestos dust in the air) still represent a health hazard and further improvements must be brought about'. In 1975 Rodney Cowton, a journalist with The Times, approached the two major British asbestos companies with mines in South Africa — Turner and Newall and Cape Industries — asking what they were doing. Both companies claimedi it was their policy to bring their operations throughout the world to British standards. 'Both claimed to be making some progress in this direction but neither would give a target date for the fulfil- ment of that policy,' he reported.7 Meanwhile blue asbestos, under a voluntary ban by the asbestos industry in the UK because of its dangerous nature, is being mined more than ever by Cape's in South Africa. One law for the white and another for the black?

5 Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol 132, 1965, p.246. 6 Letter to BSSRS, August 1977. 7 The Times, 20 January 1975.

63

Playing next to an African asbestos mine.

64

The government We live in a democracy. Industry is regulated by government. Therefore we have no problems. Or do we? The history of government control, or more correctly the lack of it, suggests serious

problems as regards industry. As early as 1906 the government were informed of the health hazards of asbestos. A Home Office report of that year8 noted, 'A typical case of Fibroid Phthisis (asbestosis) in a man who had been employed in the working of asbestos was brought to our notice.' But nothing was done. Looking back in 1934 the Senior Medical Inspector of Factories, Sir Thomas Legge, who sat on that 1906 committee, commented, 'In the light of present knowledge, it is impossible not to feel that opportunities for discovery and prevention were badly missed.'

In 1930, twenty years after they were first informed, the Factory Inspectorate at last conducted a survey10 of the health of asbestos workers. This report found that an incredible

8 'Report of the Departmental Committee on Compen- sation for Industrial Diseases', Home Office. HMSO, 1906.

9 T. 1.eggc. Industrial Maladies, Oxford University Press, 1934.

10 Merewether and Price, 'On the Effect of Asbestos Dust on

the Lungs and Dust Suppression in the Asbestos Industry', HMSO, 1930.

The conditions at Turners Asbestos Cement Co around 1930 according to W. Heath Robinson. (Turners Asbestos Cement Co)

four out of five workers were suffering from crippling asbestosis after working for more than twenty years in the asbestos textile industry. On the basis of this report and 'consultations' with the asbestos industry a 'safe 'process was suggested which allowed for two out of three workers to get asbestosis after twenty years. Some protection! This 1930 report concluded, opti- mistically, 'in the space of a decade or there- abouts, the effect of energetic applications of preventative measures should be apparent in a great reduction in the incidence of Fibrosis (asbestosis). No effort was made to check on the validity of this statement by follow-up studies of the workers involved. By the 1960s the increase in asbestosis and cancer caused by asbestos

65

Ous

66

exposure forced the government to set up another committee, which reported in 1968.11 This report, which strongly influenced the 1969 Asbestos Regulations, propagated the idea that blue asbestos was more dangerous, but had little else to say, except that the incidence of asbestos disease was clearly growing.

1969 Asbestos Regulations — summary In May 1970 the 1969 Asbestos Regulations became operative. In summary they require: 1 All types of asbestos to be regulated. 2 Any process involving the use of Crocidolite (blue asbestos), including the stripping of old lagging, to be notified twenty-eight days before work begins to the district inspector of factories. 3 'A process specified by these regulations shall have exhaust ventilation to prevent entry into the air of any dust containing asbestos that is liable to cause danger to the health of employed persons.' 4 Exhaust ventilation shall be provided to the same standard while maintenance or repair of machinery takes place. 5 The exhaust equipment shall be inspected at least once every seven days and thoroughly examined and tested by a competent person at least once in every period of 14 months. A written report of such tests shall be made within 14 days of the tests being completed. These reports shall be kept for at least two years for inspection by the Factory Inspectorate. 6 Where it is 'impracticable' to provide exhaust ventilation, approved respiratory equipment shall be provided and protective clothing. Instruction shall be given in the use of protective equipment. The protective equipment shall be kept clean. Accommodation will be provided, including separate facilities for work clothes and for protective equipment. 7 Persons employed shall use such protective clothing and equipment as is supplied.

ii 'Problems arising from the the use of Asbestos', HMSO, 1968.

8 The processes to which these regulations apply shall, 'so far as is reasonably practicable', be kept in a clean state and free from asbestos dust. The cleaning shall be done with vacuum equipment specially designed and constructed such that, 'asbestos dust neither escapes nor is discharged into the air of any workplace'. 9 All loose asbestos shall be kept in closed receptacles. No loose asbestos or asbestos waste shall be despatched or received into a factory, 'as far as is reasonably practicable', except in suitably closed containers. Containers with blue asbestos in shall be marked: 'Blue asbestos — do not inhale dust'. 10 No persons under the age of 18 may be employed on an asbestos process.

Regulations are only as ment. How good is this?

good as their enforce-

W1M.1 ROIJLA1IOt45 ARE A IT SrRJCT

ST,.L-MYflt1 WROTE THEM -AtJz) WE MAKE ASESitS.

So Mu5ThJ r GRUMBLE'

// Asbestos Regulations — prosecutions Under the 1931 Asbestos Regulations only two prosecutions were ever brought. One was against Central Asbestos (see p.59). But the 1969 Regulations were tougher and drawn up with the full knowledge of the killer nature of asbestos thirty years later in a different economic climate to the 1931 Regulations. We should expect much more. The following table gives an idea of the total number of prosecutions brought during the years 1971-76.

67

In addition there was, in 1977, 77 other prosecutions under general health regulations concerning asbestos. The average fine was £208. The magistrates fined companies less for breaking the regulations when the asbestos was

blue (f123) than with the supposedly safer other types of asbestos (f292)!

Prosecutions under the 1969 tions 1971-77 Year Number of

prosecutions 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977

7

£79 £45 £182

YO() MV5f (5E J0KtJ& My&oo MAW THE AvERAGE Flt-.JE 15 ONLY

/J82 Asbestos Regula-

Average fine (L)

40 15 39 22 23 84

Source: Health and Safety Executive Annual Reports 197 1-77.

It is worth noting the low number of prosecutions and, more depressingly, the pathetic amount companies are fined for endangering people's lives. Further details of the fines to 1975 are given in the tables below. Again their low level should be noted, and also the fact that many of the companies prosecuted are very large companies (TAC Construction, British Rail

Engineering, British Leyland, McAlpine, Burmah Oil, Yarrow Shipbuilders etc) and not backstreet outfits. Another point of concern is that some of the firms prosecuted are the specialist contractors now being employed to remove asbestos

safely.

Penalty Fines under the 1969 Asbestos Regulations 1971-76

number of number of Dan, ,Iat,nne ;.. farm ratinn

1971 £

10 Nov TAC Construction Ltd Reg 7(1) 1 Conviction 25.00

1972 13 Jan Stein Atkinson Ltd Reg 9

Reg 15 2 1

Convictions Conviction

30.00 15.00

9 Feb Fabcol Ltd Reg 7(1) 2 Convictions 60.00

1 Mar Dudley Coles Ltd Reg 6(2) Reg8(1) Reg 10

1

4 1

Conviction Convictions Conviction

50.00 240.00

60.00

l4Mar ThomasW.Ward

Wondertex Ltd

Reg6(2) Reg8(1) Reg 15 Reg 7

1

4 1

1

Conviction Convictions Conviction Conviction

30.00 600.00 150.00 100.00

Wild Barfield Ltd Reg 7(1) 1 Conviction 50.00 27 Mar 4 May

68

6 Jun Laminated Plastic Ltd Reg 7(1) 1 Conviction 25.00 21 Jul Armstrong Cork Co Ltd Reg 7 4 Convictions 200.00 Req9 2 Convictions 100.00 Req 10 1 Conviction 50.00 21 Apr J.S. Webb (Smithwick) Ltd Reg 7 1 Withdrawn —

Reg 10 1 Withdrawn — 24 Jul Thomas Charles Doleman Reg 7 1 Conviction 75.00 10 Aug S.B.D. Consto Products Ltd Reg 7 1 Conviction 50.00 24 Oct A.P.V. Kestner Ltd Reg 7 2 Convictions 100.00 12 Jul Maritime Ltd Reg 7 2 Convictions 60.00 30 Sep British Rail Engineering Ltd Reg 7 1 Withdrawn —

Reg 8 1 Conviction 50.00 Reg 9 1 Conviction 25.00 23 Nov Air Containers (Research

Department) Ltd Reg 15 1 Conviction 50.00 14 Dec Lanarkshire Steeplejacks Ltd Req 9 3 2 Convictions 90.00 1 Withdrawn

Reg 18 1 Conviction 25.00 1973 14 Feb Peter Heatley and Co Ltd Reg 9 1 Conviction 100.00 22 Feb British Leyland (UK) Ltd

(Austin-Morris Group) Reg 9 1 Conviction 225.00 22 Feb Carrier Engineering Co Ltd Req 10 1 Conviction 225.00 Req 11 1 Withdrawn —

Reg 20 1 Conviction 225.00 7 Mar Bearward Ltd Reg 9 1 Conviction 50.00 2 Apr Darlington Insulation Co Ltd Reg 6 1 Conviction 100.00 Reg 8 1 Conviction 100.00 Req 9 2 Convictions 100.00 Req 17 1 Conviction 100.00 6 Jun Sir A. McAlpine & Sons Ltd Req 6 1 Absolute

Discharge Reg8 2 Absolute

Discharge — 18 Jun Burmah Oil TRD Ltd Reg 7 1 Conviction 200.00 3Jul British Rail Engineering Ltd Reg6 1 Conviction 25.00 26 Sep T. Bailey Roofing Ltd Req 8 3 Convictions 225.00 1974 31 Jan South East Engineering

(Romford) Ltd Req 6 1 Conviction 10.00 Req 8 1 Conviction 50.00 Req 17 1 Conviction 10.00 4 Mar Dennis Timothy Lowther Req 6 1 Withdrawn —

Req 8 2 Convictions 100.00 Req 9 1 Conviction 50.00 Req 15 1 Conviction 50.00 Req 16 1 Withdrawn —

69

number of number of Penalty Regulations in formation £

4 Mar Demolition Co Partnership Ltd Reg 6 1 Conviction 100.00

Req 8 2 Convictions 200.00

Req 9 1 Withdrawn —

Req 15 1 Withdrawn —

Reg 16 1 Conviction 100.00

19 Feb K.W. McGill Co Ltd Reg 9 1 Conviction 200.00

5 Apr Dismantling Contracts Co Reg 9 1 Absolute Ltd Discharge —

Req 15 1 Conviction 50.00

9 Apr Delta Fabrications Ltd Req 7)3) 1 Withdrawn —

Req 7(4) 1 Conviction 25.00


27 Apr B.D.P. Group Req 9 1 Conviction 20.00


29 Apr St. Mary's (Contractor) Ltd Reg 6 1 Conviction 25.00

Reg 8 2 Convictions 300.00 10 Sep W.H. Arnott Young & Co Req 6 1 Conviction 30.00

Ltd Req 8 2 Convictions 200.00

23 Oct Goodman Price Ltd Reg 6 1 Conviction 50.00

Reg8 2 Convictions 10.00 Reg 9 1 Conviction 5.00 Reg 15 1 Conviction 5.00 Req 16 1 Conviction 6.00

6 Nov Smiths Industries Ltd Req 8 2 Convictions 100.00


Req 20 1 Conviction 50.00 13 Nov Fabcol Ltd Reg 7(3) 1 Withdrawn —

Req 7(4) 1 Conviction 10.00

2 Dec John Barber Shopfitters and Reg 6 1 Conviction 40.00

Building Contractor Req 8 2 Convictions 100.00

20 Nov Birds (Commercial Motors) Reg 6 1 Conviction 30.00

Ltd

1975 9 Jan Samuel McI wraith Req 6 1 Conviction 20.00


Reg 9 1 Conviction 3000

3 May Commando Cleaning Co Ltd Req 9 3 Convictions 750.00


6 Jun Durasteel Ltd Reg 9 1 Conviction 25.00


7 Oct W.G. Spittle Ltd Req 8 2 Convictions 100.00



31 Oct Yarrow Shipbuilders Ltd Req 8 1 Conviction 60.00


70

Case one: Cheaper to break the law

In 1975 Goodman and Price, a London demolition firm, was fined the grand total of £75 for breaking the 1969 Asbestos Regulations, including:

£5 for not providing respirators (which cost £5 each); £5 for not providing protective clothing (it would

cost that to supply one set). (Gillie 'The Low Cost of Factory Worker's Health', Sunday Times 23 May 1976)

Case two: Break the law and make money In March 1976 British Transport Hotels were prosecuted for breaking the 1969 Asbestos Regulations. The hotel management

ignored warnings from a firm of insulation engineers and employed two men to strip asbestos from the boilers of the Central Hotel in Glasgow. The two workers did the job for £350 and because they did not take precautions saved the firm £3,000. They were fined £100. You don't have to be an accountant to work out the saving. (The Observer 4 April 1976)

71

Frost Asbestos Removal FROST ASBESTOS REMOVAl. LIMITED Ltd. A major asbestos removal firm were prosecuted for breaking the F BT 1969 Asbestos Regulations Safety Policy in December 1975.

ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITh HEALTh AND SAFETY AT WORK ACT 1B74

ASBESTOS REGULATIONS %O igeB TO BE ISSUED TO AU. E&I.OYEES

27 PURDCYS WAY. PURDEYS INDUSTAI. ESTA1I

ROcHPORD, IUSX.

2 Dec Frost Asbestos Removal Ltd Reg 8 1 Conviction 25.00 Reg 18 1 Conviction 25.00 5 Dec Perfect Air Ltd Reg 8 2 Reg9 1

Reg 15 1 Cases withdrawn Reg 20 1 following a plea of

5 Dec Perfect Heat Engineering Reg 8 2 guilty by another Ltd Reg 9 1 contractor

Regis 1

Reg2O 1

5 Dec Peter Golding, Wedingos Reg 8 1 Conviction 30.00 M W Installations Reg 9 1 Conviction 30.00

Reg 15 1 Conviction 30.00 Reg 20 1 Conviction 30.00 8 Dec Granville Tin Plate & Co Ltd Reg 9 1 Conviction 100.00

Source: Parliamentary reply to Margaret Bain, MP, from Harold Walker, MP, Hansard 5 April 1976

Case three: Risk 10 lives at £20 per

life

In 1974 the Factory Inspec- torate found K.W. McGill's Thermal Insulation Engin-

eers, blatantly breaking the 1969 Asbestos Regulations. McGill's were removing blue asbestos lagging from Tunnel Cement Works, Pitstone, Bucks. Although they took most of the

required precautions, they failed to clear up after their work each day. A picture produced in court showed

an 15-inch layer of blue asbestos over the floor. The

vibrations from the mill

helped stir the dust up into the air. The health of at

least ten men was put at risk. The court fined McGill's £200. (Guardian 20 Feb 1974)

Case four: Gross contamination BSC fined £150

The anonymous tip-off informed the Factory lnspectorate that the British Steel Corporation (BSC) was not taking ade-

quate precautions when stripping blue asbestos from its DaIzell Works at Motherwell, Lanarkshire. Gross contamination by blue asbestos was found over pipework being dis- mantled. The workers had

not been informed of the danger and BSC had failed to ensure the asbestos did not leak into the surround-

72

ing areas. An unknown number of men had been

exposed during a two- month period in 1977.

Found guilty of breaking the Health and Safety at Work Act and the 1969 Asbestos Regulations, BSC

were fined the crippling sum of £150. After the hearing Mr James Renton, Principal Factory Inspector for metals and

minerals in the West of Scotland, said that, several

men had been examined by doctors, although no immediate side-effects had been noted'. This is not surprising as the results of asbestos exposure will take at least ten years to show up and more likely twenty. Such medical examinations are used as a cover-up for the ineffectiveness of the Factory Inspectorate in

preventing exposure.

(Guardian 22 July 1977)

Case five: Danger from asbestos skip

Working men removing lagging into a skip from pipes in shop units situated in London's Wimpole Street in August 1978 did not know they were handling deadly asbestos. The Factory Inspector prosecut- ing said, 'It was a very real

risk to the workmen and to the public.' Heuting contractors Marryat, Jackson and Morris of Croydon, and builders Rush and Tornkin of

Sidcup were fined £200 and £500 each respectively for:

1 failing to provide workmen with protective cloth- i ng; 2 failing to keep work area free from asbestos

dust; 3 failuretonotify district inspector of blue asbestos work; 4 failure to use special containers to remove asbestos waste. (Croydon Advertiser 27 Oct 1978)

Case six: £16,500 highest so far

In February 1977, Scottish and Newcastle Breweries and a demolition firm, William Waugh of Edinburgh, were fined a total of £16,500 for creating clouds of asbestos dust when demolishing an old water tank lagged with asbestos

at the brewery. This is the highest fine so far under the 1969 Asbestos Regula- tions. (Guardian 23 Feb

1977)

Prison not fines for breaking Asbestos Regulations Bill Simpson, chairman of the Health and Safety Commission, has said, 'When it comes to negligence of whatever degree I firmly believe that fines should be brought in line with those for criminal offences.' What would you get for murdering thousands of workers? At the moment most likely a knight- hood, 'for services to industry'. The asbestos industry has done just that. A couple of years ao in France magistrates put a few company directors in prison for effectively murdering some of their employees. More recently in Italy the managing directors of a chemical firm have been put in prison for up to four years for murdering many of their workers by allowing them to be exposed to known killer chemicals. Under the 1974 Health and Safety at Work Act it is possible to imprison the officials of asbestos handling companies who endanger the lives of their workers or others. Until this is done the government is only whitewashing the criminal activities of these companies.

Advisory Committee on Asbestos (ACA)

73

The members of the government's Advisory Committee on Asbestos holding hearings in public' As a direct response to the public outcry over in 1977. (Morning Star) the scandal of Hebden Bridge, the government

74

acted in its usual way: it set up a committee. In March 1976 the UK Health and Safety Commis- sion set up the Advisory Committee on Asbestos (ACA) whose terms of reference were:

To review the risks to health arising from

exposure to asbestos or products containing asbestos including: persons exposed at work; members of the public exposed to asbestos generated from work activities; members of the public exposed to asbestos from consumer products and from asbestos waste; to make recommendations as to whether any further protection is required.

The chairman of the ACA is Bill Simpson and there are fourteen members: various academic and government experts, asbestos industry, CBI and senior trade union officials. Clearly any reports from this committee will be a compromise. It first met in June 1976 and in January 1977 brought out an interim statement.12 This pathetic and dangerous statement merely reaffirmed the present unsafe level and suggested some general precautions. In March 1977 the ACA published the evidence submitted to it by various interested parties13 and iniune had a three-day session during which 'the committee met in public', heard amplifications on the written evidence, and asked questions of the organisations. No cross-examination was allowed (when this was tried the chairman, Bill

Simpson, threatened to hold the meetings in

private) so the meetings were another whitewash to allay rather than deal with worker and public fears. In May 1978 press reports'4 implied that the secretary of the Advisory Committee on Asbes- tos, Mr A.D. Carstairs, was suggesting to government press officers how they could play down the results of two reports due out from the

12 'Asbestos Health Hazards and Precautions', HMSO, 1976.

13 Selected Written Evidence Submitted to the Advtsory Committee on Asbestos', HMSO, 1977.

14 Laurie Flynn, Plan to Whitewash Killer Dust Report, Socialist Worker, 6 May 1978; Angela Singer, 'Error in Asbestos l'ests Proves "awkward"', Guardian, 11 May 1978.

committee. At all events when the reports came out15 they turned out to be the expected damp squibs. The first report suggested licensing of asbestos stripping firms, a real step forward, but it did not suggest that it be an offence for a client to use a non-licensed asbestos stripping firm. Because of this it seems as if these good- intent proposals will remain just that. Also rejected was a suggestion that TU safety representatives should have some control over asbestos stripping firms through the licensing system. According to the chairman of the ACA, Bill Simpson, this was not practical because s/he would need 'impossible legal powers' and under the rejected suggestions (from the General and Municipal Workers Union) s/he would be able to stop dangerous asbestos work.ttc And that, after all, is the last thing this committee wants! The second report concerned the 'embarrassing fact' that there is a 50 per cent error in estimating asbestos concentrations in air. It did not recommend the use of the accurate scanning electron microscope (SEM) because of cost. No mention of the 'cost' in suffering to the many workers and others who have died from asbestos- related diseases. Profit before health again. A continuation of the 1930 'co-operation' between government and industry can be seen in the fact that the Health and Safety Executive and the asbestos company front organisation 'the Asbestos Research Council' are to do joint research on the variability of asbestos monitoring to the tune of £20,000. Further reports are expected in early 1979. Press reports17 and other leaks indicate that these will be selling the health of working people down the river in the name of profit and production.

15 a 'Asbestos-work on thermal insulation and sprayed coatings', Advisory Committee on Asbestos 1st Report, HMSO, June 1978.

b 'Asbestos-measurement and monitoring of asbestos in air', Advisory Committee on Asbestos 2nd Report, HMSO, June 1978. 16 Angela Singer, 'Licensing system proposed for the asbestos industry', Guardian, 2 June 197& 17 Laurie Flynn, 'Killer dust OK, says secret report', Socialist Worker, 24 June 1978.

75

76

EEC report goes for a ban on asbestos (summary) In November 1977 the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection of the EEC produced a report'8 on the health hazards of asbestos. In very brief summary the report made the following points:

1 Safety in the workplace is an inalien- able right and should be recognised as such; 2 Asbestos has been classed as a first category pollutant in the Programme of Action of the European Committees; 3 Reform is needed in the area of safety regulations for those working with asbestos and for the general population; 4 Asbestos causes cancer; 5 Emphasised that all varieties of asbes-

tos used in the community present a danger to health; 6 No agreement can yet be reached as to whether a 'safe level of exposure' exists; 7 Calls for the setting of temporary limits of asbestos in air based on the cancer risk (no suggestion is given as to what these

'temporary' limits might be); 8 Calls for a ban on blue asbestos and on the spraying of asbestos; 9 Hopes for a directive to prevent mis-

leading advertising that has already occurred in such countries as Britain; 10 Considers that every effort should be made to develop safe substitutes for asbestos and that, as these substitutes become available, the use of asbestos should gradually be phased out (where safe substitutes already exist, the use of asbestos should be forbidden).

The 25-page working document contains much useful information.

18 John Evans, 'On health hazards of Asbestos', Rapporteur

Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer

Protection, European Parliament, Document 344/77, November

1977.

On 18 August 1975 Joe Walker, safety representative of the GMWU Heat and Frost Branch 269, arrived at a construction site in Ealing, West London, to do a job. At the site, Howard Farrows Ltd, he saw large quantities of asbestos dust lying around and noticed Marinite and Asbestolux sheets being cut by power saw. There were numerous other breaches of the 1969 Asbestos Regulations. 20 August: Joe calls in the local factory inspector. No one comes. 22 August: He phones again. 26 August: Mr Westgate, a local factory inspector, calls and says he cannot act because he is not sure if Marinite board contains asbestos. Factory Inspectorate Technical Data Note No.42 clearly states that Marinite is asbestos insulation board. 27 August: The manager sacks Joe Walker. He refuses to leave and calls in the Factory Inspec- torate again. 1 September: A senior factory inspector, Mr Pilsworth, visits the site and goes straight to management. He tells Joe Walker and other workers on the site that only 'large quantities'

77

Factory inspectors: friends or foes?

78

of asbestos are dangerous. When Joe Walker

complained about this absurd and dangerous statement, the factory inspector got management to order him off the site. 9 September: The senior factory inspector, Mr Pilsworth, writes to Howard Farrow Ltd,

making further recommendations and con-

cluding: 'Your co-operation to date and continued co-operation to overcome this hazard is appreciated.' 7 January 1976: Bill Simpson, chairman of the Health and Safety Commission, replies to the East London Health and Safety at Work Com-

mittee, who had taken up Joe Walker's case: about the dismissal of Mr J. Walker in

circumstances surrounding his complaint about asbestos contamination by asbestos dust on a construction site in Ealing... Marinite board contains 25 per cent of a form of asbestos known as Amosite (brown asbestos) and Mr Westgate advised the em-

ployer that the 1969 Asbestos Regulations applied to the work.. .On Friday the 29

August 1975 Mr Walker telephoned to complain that the company was not com-

plying with the advice given by Mr Westgate. On the following Monday, 1 September 1975, Mr Westgate again visited the site

accompanied by his colleague Mr Pilsworth. Mr Walker was present during this investi-

gation and Mr Pilsworth, the more senior of the two inspectors, considered that by his

interruptions he was impeding them carrying out an orderly and balanced investi-

gation. Consequently Mr Walker was asked either not to interrupt or to leave the scene of the investigation.. .The inspectors concluded there was a potential hazard Mr Pilsworth held a discussion with the men employed and advised them and the site management about the precautions to be observed. This advice was confirmed in letters to the main contractors and subcontractors on the 9 September 1975.

21 june 1976: Mr J.G. Hammer, HM Chief

Inspector of Factories, in a letter to The

Guardian, defends Mr Pilsworth's actions, claim-

ing: 'There was not a significant risk to work-

people. At the same time we required the employer to take appropriate precautions.' Now, was there a risk or wasn't there? Clearly, since precautions had to be taken, there was. These precautions, even if inadequate, were only taken after Joe Walker's complaints. All he got for his concern was the sack — helped, if not actually carried out, by the Factory Inspectorate. There is no protection under the 1974 Health and Safety at Work Act for workers who complain. If that's friendship — who needs enemies?

79

As early as 1906 the then government committee on industrial diseases, when informed of the first case of asbestosis in a worker, evaded the issue by inquiring:

from the Parliamentary Committee of the Trades Union Congress whether they could

80

furnish us with further information as to the prevalence of the disease in this trade, but they were unable to do so.

And the same would be true today.

Neither the TUG, nor any individual union,

arranges for studies to be done on its members with regard to the incidence of various industrial diseases. Remember that, as far as cancer from asbestos goes, studies in the US have shown that without exception research based on union records has shown greater risks to the workers than company-based studies, which shows why trade union studies are essential. Trade unions have done little for their members as regards compensations but even less as regards prevention, the primary trade union demand. They were consulted with regard to the 1969 Asbestos

Regulations, but it is difficult to see what, if any, changes they suggested. One of the major efforts of the trade union movement over asbestos has been the written submission by the TUG to the Government's

Advisory Committee on Asbestos.'9

Summary of good submission to Advisory Committee on Asbestos

In brief the evidence is as follows: 1 The TUG's major proposal is a planned

programme for the progressive compulsory substitution of all asbestos applications in the UK over the next ten years. 2 More research is required into the possible cancer hazards and safety of all sub-

stitutes. 3 An interim maximum allowable con-

centration of. 0.2 fibres of asbestos per cubic centimetre of air. This is one tenth of

the present level allowed for white asbestos, but 'In the view of the TUG a TLV or

hygiene standard for cancer-producing sub-

stances is both impractical and irrelevant: the aim should be the substitution of safer

materials for asbestos products and processes.' This is not a safe level.

9 'Seleccd wriflen CVjdCOCC suhmiitcd to the Advisory

CommiteC oo AshestOs 1976-77' (1 UC evidence pill). IIMSO,

1977.

4 The TUC is particularly concerned that the development of these cancers may result from the briefest exposure to the smallest concentrations of asbestos dust, inc1udin dust which is brought home on workers overalls. 5 The present Asbestos Regulations and Hygiene Standards (as noted in Technical Data Note 13) are totally inadequate to provide protection against cancer risks. 6 The TUC is totally opposed to the proposal that workers be discriminated against on the grounds that they are or are not susceptible to certain hazards. Workplaces should be made safe for all workers. 7 All asbestos-containing products should be labelled. 8 Employers should be required to draw up and, at appropriate intervals, revise a register of all asbestos products used or kept. 9 All workers who may regularly be exposed to asbestos dust should be identified and listed by the employer. 10 Asbestos workers should have regular six-monthly medical checks and their records should be kept for fifty years or until they die. 11 The TUC is very concerned about the 'jungle' of contracting in the thermal insulation field and therefore contractors should be licensed. 12 Some specific details are given with regard to asbestos insulation. 13 Lung cancer and Laryngeal cancer should be prescribed as industrial diseases. 14 All raw asbestos should be imported in strong and secure containers and such containers should be prominently labelled: DANGER — RAW ASBESTOS.

An appendix to the main report deals with the health hazards of glass fibre. Most unions submitted their comments to the TUC and these were incorporated in the above submission. Some unions have gone abit further. The Union of Construction Allied Trades and Technicians (UCATT) conducted a questionnaire

81

USE OF ASBESTOS

Interim Advice Union olCeestruction. Allied Trades

wITeceddaes

survey of their branches in 1976 and found 15 deaths and 68 cases of asbestosis.2° The 1976 National Delegate Conference passed an emer-

gency resolution which called for a ban on asbestos-based materials by UCATT members.

UCATT actions over asbestos UCATT executive council have not called for a ban, but for a 'planned phasing out of asbestos materials used by our members as soon as

possible'. They have produced a folder, 'Use of Asbestos — Interim Advice', which is available from regional offices, but intend to review it when the ACA publishes its final report.21 They clearly feel having one of their own union members, Bill Lewis, on the ACA, will make the latter's report worthwhile (but see p.73).

GMWU actions over asbestos The thermal insulation side of the General and Municipal Workers' Union (GMWU) have gone further than this, stating that the 1969 Asbestos Regulations are not tight or specific enough and that, 'even if it were possible to get a perfect set of regulations the GMWU believes that the employers are unwilling and the Factory Inspec- torate unable to enforce these regulations.'

82

20 Viewpoint', IJCATT Journal, October 1976. 21 'Viewpoint', UCAT'I' Journal, March 1977.

Smiling trade union officials (TUCand GMWU) with directors of Turner and Ne walls on a visit to a UK asbestos factory in 1977 (nBA).

Therefore the GMWU are demanding that the Thermal Insulation Contracting Industry be licensed under the 1974 Health and Safety at Work Act. As early as March 1977 they produced draft regulations which they regarded as the ACA. In brief summary these regulations: Would require anyone doing thermal insulation work to be licensed by the Health and Safety Executive. The register of licensed operators would be available for inspection and updated every three months. Licences would be given only to those operators who can clearly meet the asbestos regulations and agreements between union and management. The licence could be revoked if these conditions are not satisfied. Because of the inability of the Factory Inspec- torate to police all sites and factories a key part of these proposed regulations is the appointment of 'workers inspectors' — these in addition to the safety representatives appointed under the Health and Safety at Work Act from October 1978. In addition to training, the workers' inspectors would have the following rights: to inspect asbestos sites at any time; to bring advisers onto an asbestos site; to inspect any relevant documents; to take any samples; to be present when Health and Safety

Inspectors are called in; to issue reports on matters relating to health and safety; to advise workers to stop work where necessary without loss of pay or victimisation for so doing; to have time off with pay for training and duties; to be able to prosecute before a magistrate for breaches of these regulations; to have access to medical records.

The workers' inspector would not have a legal duty under these regulations nor be liable. Any claim that might arise against the workers' inspector should be covered by the licensed operator's insurance. We have seen (p.75) that the proposals of the Advisory Committee on Asbestos do not meet

83

these basic requirements: what will the GMWU do to protect their members if these watered down recommendations become law? We quote Frank Earl, the GMWU National Officer responsible for thermal insulation workers,22 'They are at the forefront, seeing colleagues dying all the time, and asbestos has become a highly emotive subject. If they see it being treated casually they will not stand for it and will stop work if there is any danger.' From this statement it would seem that the GMWU is prepared to back up its committee work with support from the shop floor. But the reality seems far different as this letter23 from GMWU thermal insulation workers on strike for safe working conditions with asbestos late in 1978 shows:

22 Peter Hildrew, 'Insulation workers help asbestos victims', Guardian, 3 June 1978. 23 'Asbestos strike — the laggers view', Hazards Bulletin, No.14, December 1978.

GMWU in practice — the rank and file view

The dispute started because

our men were asked to strip the tops of some vessels

which contained asbestos. Our men said they would carry Out the work when they had on site the appropriate asbestos protective clothing and showering facilities which were not on site at that time. So what happened was the day was Friday afternoon and we don't work week- ends. The men expected to start the job on Monday morning. When they went to start they found that ICI personnel had already done it and asbestos insulation was lying on the floor in the surrounding

84

area. So the men reported this to their Stewards who called a Site meeting where it was decided once and for all to take CI on in a fight over asbestos stripping which we believe only trained thermal insulation engineers should do. ICI use men who come off redundant plants and

make them insulators. We have been fighting this issue for a number of years. The GMWU have

always promised us action and done nothing. We have taken strike action before but in our naivety we have

always let the GMWU kid us back to work.

But not this time. We have

been out over 15 weeks now and getting nowhere. We

started this action by first going to stewards stepping up to regional then national. The national officer Frank Earl had a meeting with Id National Management. It broke down. CI would not even talk about us; they say they don't recognise us

as tradesmen.

CI don't provide protective clothing, they don't damp down the job or anything like that. If the Factory Inspector calls they can

show him all their equipment. The Stewards at Huncorn called them in

six times over different jobs and five times the Factory Inspector agreed with the stewards that regulations were being broken. One ICI boss when

ing around the site replied 'Oh it's been there ages that' and brushed it off. Can you imagine that? The Inspector goes away and

nothing happens. You ring and ask and they say it's being dealt with. Dave Gee (the GMWU Health and Safety Officer) phoned me on 15 October to ask what was happening at Runcorn. I explained it all to him. He told me he would be gettin in touch with Frank Earl our National Officer. I don't know whether he did or not because after 14 weeks of dealing with the GMWU I am very suspicious of everything they do. As far as an intra-union squabble he is right. The ICI personnel doing our work are in the GMWU. But we have been told in the past by GMWU officials that union policy is that craftsmen will be protected in our industry, now the GMWU is back-pedalling because our own members are doing it. People say there is no law stating they cannot carry out work concerning asbestos and that Thermal Insulation Engineers (TIES) have no special training in asbestos. But we dispute this, our knowledge of asbestos is that we and TIES before us have always worked in this industry and may I say that an awful lot of TIES DIED through

substance. But in them days there was no panic about it and firms and governments weren't offer- ing vast sums of money to get rid of it from their sites and factories. There were no fly by night demolition firms willing to do anything for a fast buck. Now because we want to get it outlawed so that only trained TIES strip asbestos insulation we are told anybody can do it and SHUT UP. Well not me.

A lot of men in insulation have died in complete ignorance to the fact that they were exposed to this deadly substance. People talk about HEBDEN BRIDGE which was a

TRAGEDY but also nobody realises that hundreds of men have died in thermal insulation. What do the GMWU and Thermal Insulation Contractors Association value it at? A measly 50p per hour. Not that the money means anything to me I don't want to go near it if I can help it. I have in the past, but the past weeks have made me more aware of the dangers.

asked why asbestos was ly- being exposed to this deadly

An official GMJVU picket at the 1977 hearings of the government's Advisory Committee on Asbestos. But was this the limit of GMWU action? (Morning Star)

85

86

It is clear that at the top level the trade unions are trying to do something. Whether it is enough or how serious they are is debatable. Without some TUC muscle behind their recommendations all the fine words will end up as just one more bit of paper produced from the dead bodies of people killed by asbestos. Likewise with the GMWU recommendations.

As will be seen from the accounts throughout this pamphlet, the view from the bottom, of trade unionists trying to fight the hazards of asbestos, is not flattering. All too often they get no help from their unions and sometimes obstruction. There are still no union-sponsored health studies on asbestos workers. Very few unions have health and safety departments and those that do are vastly overworked. No unions offer scientific, technical or medical advice and sampling to their members on the shop floor in any detailed way. No unions are looking at the best work procedures: clearly there has got to be a lot more action over this issue than there is at present.

-rELt YoV U/HAT -: WELL po iT IF ThE flONEyc t'I6HU'

SoME UNIONc BAGA1W Wfl6ES ,(,4iWcT SYFETX..

You F)cPT5 H4VE &Q4OiPJ Fos YE.4R5 ThII4T A5AES7,s is

vjec'e iee.j ApJ o& iv... [j.

Scientists and doctors With very few exceptions doctors and scientists have not played a great part in the prevention of asbestos diseases. Most company doctors and scientists, and many others concerned with the use of asbestos (for example architects and engineers), have accepted the mentality of industry so fully that they are not even aware of the problem. As we shall see, the aim of industry is production and profit for a few not health and safety. And those who pay the piper call the tune. In a way the problems started in 1906 with Dr Montague Murray. He reported on the death from asbestosis of the last survivor of ten men weaving asbestos, but added in his report to the 1906 Government Enquiry on Compensa- tion, 'One hears eneraUy speaking, that considerable trouble is now taken to prevent the inhalation of the dust so that the disease is not so likely as heretofore.' Where would he 'generally speaking' have heard this from? Some of the manufacturers? It is very doubtful that he spoke to any workers, for he might then have learnt the truth. By 1930 the British government had woken up and produced a report, but as late as 1956, one of the authors of that report, Dr Merewether, commented in the standard text of the day on industrial medicine: 'Nothing has emerged to suggest departure from this (1930) practical standard'. It would have been more honest to say: nothing has emerged. For when he wrote that, nothing had! No studies had been done by the asbestos industry, its doctors and scientists, to see if these 'practical standards' had in fact worked. It is only recently that we are beginning to see some thorough medical studies in the UK — 47 years after that first report. Even so, in the UK and most other countries, the studies done on asbestos workers are done with the consent and 'help' of the asbestos industry — not to mention the money. This state of affairs encourages 'independent' research workers to 'understand' the problems of the asbestos industry. The net result of all this 'co- operation' is that the workers and communities

87

fighting asbestos can rely on little independent expert help. This was illustrated in June 1977 when in Cork, Eire, the local residents appealed against planning permission for an asbestos dump. Ranged against them at the enquiry was the Irish government, in the form of the Irish Development Authority, and the company — Raybestos Manhattan of the USA. With the vast amount of money available to them — £10,000 was spent on a public relations exercise by Raybestos alone before the hearing — the industry and government brought over many experts to defend their case, including

Professor Corbett McDonald, Professor of Occupational Health at the University of London and head of the TUC Centenary Institute of Occupational Health, Dr Robert Murray, now an independent consultant and formerly the medical adviser of the TUC, Dr Muriel Newbouse, reader in Occupational Medicine at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and a world authority on asbestos diseases. Indirectly, Professor Irvin Selikoff of the USA was also used by the asbestos industry for their defence, together with many others. Against this, with few resources, the local residents had a local doctor, Jim O'Neil, who had had to bring himself up to date on asbestos diseases, Professor P.F. Holt, retired, from Reading Uni-

versity, and several local experts.

Clearly, money had already tipped the scales in favour of the asbestos industry. Some of the experts brought over by the IDA have interesting backgrounds: Professor Corbett McDonald in 1971 published a major study24 on the health of miners at the two largest asbestos mines in Quebec, Canada. This study showed few health hazards — in fact it went further and suggested that asbestos miners were healthier than non-asbestos miners in Quebec of the same age. Asbestos is good for you! 24 Archives of Environmental Health, vol 22, 1971, p.667.

88

NOl4S*4$.. JU.ST A COIWVL O Pl.S *4 .

This study has been criticised for having many flaws, not least the inclusion of many workers who had worked for less than a year in the mines. As Herbert Seidman, chief of Statistical analysis at the American Cancer Society, commented: 'I think the data has been collected fairly well but analysed quite poorly.' At the 1972 US government hearings, where the standard for asbestos was set at 5 fibres/cc, reducible to 2 in 1976 (the US unions wanted 2 at once), McDonald argued for a 'reasonable' standard of 5 to 9 fibres/cc. The research he did was supported by the Canadian asbestos industry. In November 1976 McDonald was brought over to Ireland as independent expert by the Irish government to allay local residents' fears about the asbestos factory. He assured the residents the plant would be safe, but in a letter to one of the residents he admitted he did not know what he was talking about. If he was not 'professionally competent', as he admits, what was he doing assuring people the asbestos plant was safe?

t.ød,e $.A..I .9 HypIsu. sul Tr.pBssI

KappsI San., (Go.... $m.e.) Lend.. WCIB 7HT Tp5w., 01 - lS3 (St 251 FM; THE TUCC(NTThU,lNsTrn

JCMcO/CTB January 19th 1977

Hr P Burke, 7 Westcowt, Ballincollig. Co Cork, Bepihlic of Ireland.

Dear Hr Burke.

I am replying to your letter of 2nd January o,s return fro. a visit to North I do not considar opself profesion.l1y coetant to cont or the adr,uacy of the proposed level of the eu(ssior of asb.ut.. fibres fr-a. the kaybestos factory in Ovens, Co Cork. Ieesr, I speisasized during recent visit that the essential point was that local a.nitoring should ensure that Operation of the factory did not result in any significant increase in the level of asbestos fibr.x locally at groved lanai. I was assured thit the emission Standird to be observed would achieve this, and providad that this is so. I us cowaletely confident that operation of the plant will lot I. responsible for the Occurrence of any anbestøs related disease in the persems living or working In the area. I was inford that only chrysotilo asbeota. was to be used In th, plant, and this being so. I a. Convinced fr-s. past eqariance that there is no rational cause for anxiety.

Yours Sincerely.

C.4.,n Corhett McDonald. PC,FHEp Professor

89

90

Dr Robert Murray is very well qualified in industrial medicine. He holds many degrees and diplomas in the subject, has lectured at Manchester University on occupational health, was a medical inspector of factories from 1947 to 1956. He has been involved in this field at the International Labour Office and, perhaps most important of all, was the medical adviser to the TUC from 1962 until 1974. He was awarded the OBE in 1978, and is now a consultant in occupational health. Dr Murray's involvement with the effects of asbestos started early in his career, when he was a medical inspector of factories for the government. He was responsible for inspecting Hebden Bridge in 1949. Although he 'criticised strongly' the methods of handling the crude asbestos used at the company, he thought they were just 'teething troubles' and commented in a letter to the management:

Conditions as they are now are likely to exercise some influence on clinical appear- ances in the future (that is they will cause asbestos diseases). . In general conditions at the factory are good. . . Once you are over your teething troubles the factory should be a very good one. 25

A good one for what? Certainly not for the workers' health. He visited the factory again in 1952 and was satisfied with the exhaust ventilation arrangements. The industrial carnage at Hebden Bridge speaks for itself and anybody who has been associated with it has it on their conscience. At the Cork hearing Dr Murray commented: 'I don't think I was the subject of any criticism.' A very insensitive statement. In 1967 Dr Murray, as the medical adviser to the TUC, produced a joint leaflet with the Port Management (published, it should be added, by the Asbestos Information Committee) on the hazards of asbestos to dockers. Basically the gist of the report was that 'no unacceptable risk at present exists' and 'Dockers may proceed with confidence in the handling of asbestos cargoes'. The report did add that if an asbestos bag burst

25 Report by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration (Ombudsman)', Hebden Bridge, March 1976,p.9.

Dr Robert Murray, ex- TUC Medical Adviser. (The Observer)

open then: 'Respiratory protection would be advisable during clean-up operations' (our emphasis). The response of the London dockers was to ban asbestos. The last word on this report should go to Roger Hurley, TGWU Southampton Docks, 'We've seen the damage this stuff can do. If this committee of enquiry thought there was no risk to dockers in the handling of asbestos and it hasn't damaged our health in the past they should have come to Southampton. It's disgusting that the TUC medical adviser should have supported this whitewash of its handling in the docks.' Dr Murray supported26 the building of the new asbestos factory in Cork, Ireland, and in July 1978 the International Federation of Chemical, Energy and General Workers' Union (ICEF), informed about Murray's action in the US where, 'He testified on behalf of management, and in total opposition to the American trade union position in regard to an acceptable cancer policy' issued a circular27 concluding, 'The position of Robert Murray is entirely in line with the most conservative industry policies conceivable and is totally contrary to the position of the entire trade union movement.' Apparently when he was the TUC's medical adviser he would jokingly refer to the time he had been called a 'bosses' lackey.'2 8

Dr Muriel Newbouse has since 1965 published some excellent medical papers on the dangers of asbestos. These, in particular, show up the health hazards to those living near asbestos factories and to the families of asbestos workers. For all this work, while not funded directly by the asbestos industry, Dr Newhouse has had to rely on their 'co-operation' for most of her information. There are indications that this close relationship with the industry has enabled her to 26 Lawrence McGinty, 'Asbestos Allegation could lead to legal action', New Scientist, 14 July 1977, p.69. 27 'Testimony of Robert Murray...', Circular 115/78, International Federation of Chemical, Energy and General Workers' Union, 27 July 1978. 28 NewScienrist, 28 January i975,p.28.

91

appreciate their problems of late. For instance, at a US conference29 on industrial cancer in 1975 she commented:

Recently an industrial physician at an

flbIS'EASEs asbestos factory explained with tears in his

JI LJSE eyes how difficult it was to make asbestos workers wear caps at work. Our factory

I workers are boys who particularly favour

k.1ib Ai wild hair, and I expect they go home covered in asbestos, because they will not wear their caps.

As Professor Selikoff commented in reply: 'I think if we kept asbestos out of the long hair we would also keep it out of the workers' lungs'.

More recently, Dr Newhouse was brought over

by the Irish Development Authority to defend the siting of an asbestos dump near a school. She commented: 'On health grounds, I would not mind having an asbestos dump, like the one proposed, sited at the end of my garden'. Those

increasing numbers of companies and contractors looking for sites to dump asbestos waste might like to take up her offer!

Professor Irvin Selikoff There is no doubt, if

you were to ask anyone familiar with the asbestos controversy who in the world had been the most critical of the safety standards, the answer would be Professor Selikoff of Mount Sinai Hospital, New York. He has also produced the most meaningful figures for asbestos diseases in workers, based on union records. But he still has to finance the studies and his department, and produce results. Where will the money come from? In January 1977 (New York Times) it was announced that he had obtained a joint contract from the asbestos industry and the unions for an

attempt to cure asbestos cancers. This was to look at attempts to cure the estimated 70,000 Mesotheliomas that will occur in US workers in the next 40 years due to asbestos, according to Professor Selikoff. The amount given was

29 Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol 271,

1976, p.505.

92

The corruption and existence of the 'medical- industrial complex' in Australia has recently been documented ('Work as a Health Hazard', Matt Peacock, Legal Service Bulletin January 1979, p.2) with regard to the

cover-up over asbestos health hazards and standards. t seems that a similar role of scientists and doctors posing as 'independent experts' whilst being close to the asbestos industry, has recently occurred over the building of an asbestos brake lining factory in Balerna, Italy. (Asbestos February 1979, p.43)

S250,000 each from the asbestos industry and unions. This may sound a lot, but in terms of lawsuits for S1,000,000 or so to individual US workers crippled and killed by asbestos diseases it is not. What the US asbestos industry has bought is goodwill. Already it is paying off. That's how it S: however independent the expert, in the end he or she has got to make a living. This means selling yourself to the highest bidder, like the rest of us, and in the area of industrial health and safety this is nearly always a company. Workers and community have little money and resources available to them. These are just some of the worldwide experts on asbestos diseases. It has ot to such a state in Britain that lawyers acting for asbestosis sufferers find it hard to get a doctor with specialist knowledge on asbestos to testify for them. They are nearly all connected to the asbestos industry one way or another. This has been well documented in the US3° and called the 'medical- industrial complex'. There is little point in men- tioning them all, except perhaps Professor Sir Richard Doll who is the most authoritative British medical expert on the investigation of industrial and social illness (epidemiology).

Professor Sir Richard Doll of Oxford University has been associated with the investigation of the health hazards of asbestos since 1955. In that year he published a medical paper based on information from Turner and Newall's factory at Rochdale, which confirmed the lung cancer hazard of working with asbestos as ten times that of the average population (see p.25). But in a 1968 medical paper he reported: Men and women who were exposed only since January 1st 1933 (the date of the

introduction of the 1931 Asbestos Regula- tions), have had a mortality (death) experience close to the national average.. .The results provide grounds for believing that 30 a Expendable Americans, Viking Press, 1974; b Rachel Carson, Muscle and Blood;

c Bill Richards, 'New data on asbestos indicate cover-up of effects on workers', Washington Post, November 1978.

93

the occupational hazard of bronchial cancer (lung cancer) has been largely eliminated.31

Needless to say the asbestos industry made much use of this conclusion, but in 1972 a new medical officer at Turner Brothers, Dr Lewinsohn, found a much higher incidence of asbestos disease at the factory. More was to come.

In January 1977 the Sunday Times32 released the results of an up-dated study of the 1968 work done in Professor Doll's laboratory by Julian Peto. In brief, Peto's study showed that the 'safe' level, based on information from Turner Brothers' Rochdale factory, which claimed to allow 'only' 1 in every 100 workers to get asbestos-related diseases after a lifetime's exposure to 2 fibres

per cubic centimetre of air, may in fact allow 1

in every 14 to get asbestos-related diseases!

THE OXFORD TIMES. FRIDAY. FEBRUARY 4

asbestos safety story

31 British Journal of Industrial Medicine, vol 25, 1968,

p.293. 32 Official Safe Limit for asbestos may put one in fourteen

at risk', Sunday Times, 30 January 1977.

An Oxford professor has The report was produced by absolute safety with

denied that research member of Ste Rtchatds team. Which can cauto oaucer

I do Mt JaIt.fl Peto. .staxsttotan. and ste Rthard satd the report had

parteflent is eupecled to he pubhsfsed fl .n assunted that asbeStOs depOstted

I has thrown serIous spphed mathematics pipe' in beonctasi lobes acctateulated

doubt on asbestos safety t,isis almost cersatr,ly

standards. Soeday tintrue. said So Richard and

The report. a, yet unpub- Research has been financed by added the assutopUons had to be

Stilted, will show predtctions the Department of Health and be wade toter sahat the tmploa-

that asbestos buds at halt tite Soctat Sectae,ty. and the team tions mould be for the ptodtactaon

rmttted safe I sd on, oeorhtes tee 51 lx hoxsod ,etthir of the disoase.

force could cx It the lfnirersay department- The teports ttad both he en car.

ltisduetohetollottiedbY r,edcutreitbtttnashextontodtet

person na hussdr,d exposed another — also teoptablisbed — tty Stt Ricbatd eatd 'I feel oety

to asbestos for all his or her ,eport by both Mt prto and so ,ttonglnittatarttclecshOtihu not

workang Itfe dytng of ashes- Rechaod.whsChsidltaoktnaxhee' to eittnefl ,eitttoUt seeing the tot safety at its main tart tepOrt

The chances of emingltso& lisouldsoythatthttpteSent

cancot would be increated by 25 ,rporttst,senttallrirtetecatteto

cent At petntitned Icons the ,JiistUlCSdOfl safety The teat rn port t,om I

I figment esotsid be ruice as ugh wtxh skit report esteacted data I

Rut Professor Sir Richard sir Rtchard said the first tepon mill be cowitta out stiortlr-

I Dolt Rejas ptofrsso,ot could sot beaned to Sf000 satety Ptrdtctiors of disease rates

Medicine who ts head of ,t. standatdt tntc dcccl with the wit riots of asbestos

Cancet EpsdemiclOgy and Clint- I think tome of the assistttp' util not be confirmed uettl

%n0 ;od:cbnedt000,nwero

94

Professor Doll replied at once. In the Oxford Times (4 February 1977) he commented: 'I don't think we have any justification for doubt- ing the safe levels', and his view was well used by Ted Deane, managing director of Raybestos Manhattan (Ireland), on a radio programme about the safety levels in the new asbestos factory in Cork.

Ted Deane, managing Those who pay the piper director of Ray bestos' factory in Cork. (Donal It is clear that workers and community groups Sheehan) have the odds weighted heavily against them,

mainly because they do not have the money, and hence the power, that companies and government organisations have. But there is more to it than that: most of the information in the past ten years or so about asbestos comes from the asbestos industry. We have already examined He who paye the piper some of the red herrings it has spread around, calls the tune.., but equally important, and far more insidious and difficult to document, is the social effect of this information. Even doctors and scientists sympathetic to the labour movement have to use this information, or at least wade through it. Couple this with the social background of most doctors, and to a lesser degree the other professions, and you will see why they find it easier to talk and work with asbestos industry executives than shop stewards or council tenants. We have seen how even the asbestos industry's fiercest critic, Professor Selikoff, has now become indirectly employed by it. There is no suggestion that these doctors and scientists have deliberately sold themselves to the highest bidder, just that, being non-political in a political world, they are being used. Obviously the labour movement must directly employ more doctors and professionals in direct contact with and controlled by the rank and file members, but this is only a partial solution. A society that puts the health of all its people as a first priority will automatically produce professionals who do likewise. This is one of the essentials of a socialist society.

95

The 1976 Barbican building workers' strike over the health hazards of asbestos

shows how the professionals' in this case the architects, give no thought when specifying materials to the health hazards to the workers using them, nor to the people subsequently exposed to them. In this case the workers, at some cost to themselves, forced

the architects to think again. In nearly all cases

they could have done without asbestos. No doubt if the original design had

been right in all cases

asbestos would not have

been required. In April 1976 the building workers on the £55 million

96

Barbican Arts Centre site in London decided unanimously that they would not work with asbestos. They informed their employer, John Laing, of their decision.

Despite this, Laing's brought asbestos on to the site. On 26 May the men

found a pile of asbestos

scrap and dust. The men who had worked with this material had no safety equipment. Management were told to clean it up. Nothing happened, so the men went out on strike for 2 weeks. As the UCATT Convenor Steward, Jim Franklin, commented:

Six weeks ago we were told the offending material would be

banned from the site... It is not only ourselves

we are concerned about.

but our families and the residents who live here.

Another UCATT steward, AIf Reid, said:

Our strike to get the dust out is not just about the building of the centre now, but about the people who move in as well. They are planning to use a lot more of it here, on a suspended ceiling, for fire-proofing a cafeteria and for insulation.

The project manager for Laing's on the site, Mr H. Denning, replied:

They've got it all wrong. The dangerous material was a blue one, which was banned from this country in 1970... If the workers abide by the listed precautions there is no danger at all. They

1-pctT jc*') NOW

a'tlf &° tflyw

N C

Case one: Buiiding workers do architect's job

Lf

know well enough they must simply put water on the floor when they are sweeping up the dust • ..We are using it as a fire precaution, and F

wish people would think about the number of lives it saves a year.

As Jim Franklin commented: 'Not a complete victory, but when you were completely ignored as to the using of asbestos on site before the dispute, we did achieve something.' Several points arise out of this dispute: 1 Why did the architects specify asbestos in the first place? Cheapness or ignorance because of the fact that their major source of information on asbestos is the industry itself through the Asbestos Information Committee (see p.60 ). It seems that all the asbestos could have been done away with, if it had been designed that way. Why was only Y2" of space allowed when fitting 'irreplaceable' Durasteel? 2 Why didn't UCATT immediately ban the use of asbestos in the above areas? Why didn't UCATT seek alternative products or designs from architects as regards Durasteel? 3 The residents, maintenance staff and future demolition workers owe a

great debt to the 550 Barbican workers who struck in 1976 at their own expense.

BROL/aHT A8ouy TI/IS DISPUTE By BR/Nc! THIS KILLER ASeESTOS ON T1415 CONTRACT

UNKNLAJ1J TO ThE S5O_PERATIV BAI?6f(AN ARTS ((A/T,c[

K E. MEN Li/U NOT RETUJ TO LJO UNTiL THE

KILLER ASBESTOS is REt'1Qv0 F1?o,i

97

The sign says it all —

Barbi can workers striking over asbestos hazards in 1975. (Evening Standard)

3OHN LAIAJ

Case two: Laggers of TGWU 7/162

fight back

The Glasgow TGWU 7/162 Thermal Insulation Branch has traced up to August 1978 115 dead and confirmed sufferers from asbestos-related diseases out of about 600 members —

mainly asbestosis, heart attacks and cancer. Many of those that have died were in the 40-60 age group. As one of the past secreta- ries of the branch, James P.

McKenna, said: It's a sore thing, you know, you could almost call me a professional mourner. I went to 26 funerals in one year. Four were in one week. Every one of them died from the bug, the asbestos.

Arthur Rhodie, a former member of the branch, classified as having been 30 per cent disabled by asbestosis, added:

I'm 38 years old and I'll be lucky if I've got five years to live. By chance my doctor spotted my clubbing fingers and sent me for a check-up. They confirmed I had asbestosis.

What the hell's asbestosis?

The way it gets you is

bad. You get these sharp

pains in your side and

shoulders. It comes on you sudden. You'll be out shopping with your wife and then suddenly your legs will go. The pains in my fingers and

9g

toes are getting worse and

worse. You have to wear shoes a size bigger and

they'll probably go bigger again. You become very self-conscious about the whole thing... it affects the most intimate parts of your life. I came into the lagging industry as a boy in 1952. I've worked for most of them — Capes,

Newalls, Anderson Insulation. All the time I got no training in

safety whatsoever. We didn't know to ask about the asbestos we were spraying. And the employers, well, they didn't tell us. After going to court and with some

argument, I got £2,500. It's a wonderful system for the employers —

£2,500 for a man's life! If you rob a bank or someone then there'll be a squad of police officers after you. They'll bring you to trial and you'll get plenty for it. But what about these people and

what they do to us?

Apparently that's quite acceptable.

Nettie Brown's husband, Jas,

died from cancer caused by asbestos exposure at the age of 47. The biopsy showed

he had a cancerous fluid on the lung. In seven months he was dead. Jas worked with them all: Newalls,

Cape, Wright, Andersons and Norbury. Nettie described his last days

He loved dancing and

football. Then all of a

sudden he took this

pain and went into hospital. They gave him a biopsy. After that he

really got bad.

When he went home he

was a changed man He couldn't be bothered to see anyone. He couldn't walk. His hair went grey. His legs were as thin as

a child's. It was pathetic. I used to hope that I'd never see him again. That's what it does to you. They took his football and his dancing. It got so bad he couldn't even take a glass of beer.

He just withered away, sitting and sitting, with the dog for company.

During the Second World War some members of the 7/162 branch called for an investigation into health conditions in the insulation industry. They got nowhere with their local group secretary and the boss of their union, Ernest Bevin, told them there was a war on and he didn't want any nonsense about safety at

work. In 1959 the workers at Newalls Insulation started asking questions about health and requesting investigations and the like. As John Todd says:

We asked and asked

again. We got precisely nowhere We were told the laggers weren't covered by the 1930 Asbestos Regulations.

Then, in 1966, we decided to fight and demanded health checks, masks and protective clothing. We were on strike for 41/2

weeks. As a result the employers agreed to give us medical examinations every two years. They gave them to us once. Since then nothing. They also agreed to set up a joint health committee. It met a few times just after the dispute. But it hasn't

met for about four years!

In 1967 the men of 7/162 raised their fate with their Members of Parliament, who raised it with the government, who raised it with their civil servants, who raised it with the Factory Inspectorate, who provided a little bit of information the men of 7/162 already knew. The same happened when they wrote to the Scottish TUC. James Jack, general secretary, said the General

Council agreed to 'indicate interest and concern'. As

a result of an article in the Scots Sunday Mall in January 19681 by Profes- sor Alexander Mair, head of the Scottish Occupational Health Service, pleading for workers to inform him of dust hazards and promising quick action, the men of 7/1 62 wrote to him inform- ing him of their plight. The Professor was too busy to write back himself, so one of his assistants replied:

We can only enter a

factory.., at the invita- tion of management who must of course pay us a fee for the investigation. We have already tried writing to all registered handlers of asbestos to try and persuade them to let us investigate their environments. But with few exceptions, the replies have been quite firmly negative.

That was an academic dead- end as far as the men of 7/162 were concerned. John Todd has spent many years trying to get his union, the TGWU, to do something over asbestos. He has been barred from the Scottish TUC's health and safety schools after attacking the union's record of total inaction. In 1972 he had to write to the US Asbestos Workers Union for information as his own union insisted that all information was con-

99

Nf!1PA. Lt S

1

' John Todd (left) and Jim Heggie outside Ne walls works

fidential. He was granted an interview with Mr A.C. Blygton, the TGWU's legal department secretary and the person responsible for health and safety at the TGWU. When Mr Blygton found out who John Todd was the interview was refused and a letter written to the US Asbestos Workers Union indicating that there were no problems, and

everything was under control. Currently Mr Blygton is the TGWU representative on the government's Advisory Committee on Asbestos. With this view held at the top of the TGWU, it is

easy to see why they are applying the 'big stick' to the actions of John Todd and other rank and file trade unionists. It is clear that other trade union branches must support and extend the struggles of John Todd and his branch to eliminate the health hazards of asbestos.2

1 'Health? Scots workers do not care — Prof.', Sunday Mail, 28 January 1968. 2 Much of the story of the struggles of John Todd and other members of TGWU 7/162 comes from an excellent and seminal

pamphlet, 'Asbestos — the dust that kills in the name of Profit', Socialist Workers Party, 1973.

100

Case three: The struggle to ban asbestos

on a building sight

Micky Hoolihan describes the struggle to ban asbestos

at the Greater London Council building site in Juniper Street, Stepney: When the 1974 Health and

Safety at Work Act was

being discussed we got an

agreement from the G LC that we would not wait for the Act to become law, On

our particular site, the lads

accepted me to be their Safety Steward. It's very important that you know what you're talking about. As an example, we had a bloke down from Cape Asbestos telling us all the old bollocks that asbestos

was safe when worked properly. In that situation,

I was able to quote him from the Chief Inspector of Factories, saying that he was not prepared to say that any amount of asbestos

exposure was safe. Well, even I didn't realise that the asbestos was being used as

extensively as it was. In fact it was one of the carpenters who came to the Stewards' meeting and

gave a report on how dangerous the stuff was. There was a coating of it all over the floor. The site agent was completely unaware of the dangers of asbestos. We banned the stuff from the site completely, and that position remains in effect to this day.

Now, in a sense, I've made it sound all too easy. I've

got a whole dossier on the dispute. In particular we had a run-in with the third from top in the GLC construction branch. The person who did the asbestos dust counts in the air was connected with the asbestos companies! I'd rather have had an independent assessor. I called in the factory inspector and he said the asbestos should be removed with an industrial vacuum cleaner equipped with special filter etc. When the industrial cleaners arrived they brought some old antiquated machine.

Eventually having stopped work in that area, we got two new machines on the site. When the lads decided not to work in that area, their bonus could not be maintained at the levels they had been earning — a drop in wages as a result of taking a stand on asbestos We asked that the management should make up their earnings. This demand was eventually won — though it took a stoppage and some very hard bargaining to get it. In fact the lads lost money through going out the gate on this matter of

principle. Just for the record, it was the lads who stopped work in that area.

The factory inspector could have prosecuted if he had wanted to. But he was really leaving itup to us.

'I think the lesson of all this is that shop stewards are going to have to prepare themselves.., arm themselves with all information possible. (Hazards Bulletin No 6Apr11 1977)

IT, A CRY/N h 5if/1ME 1qii- Tht7$E WOR/cR5 p,p flQW5

CFNEf

101

p

I- I -I. '_

4_ — —

Chapter 5 Substitutes for asbestos

2 Any good chest specialist will tell you that no dust is good for your lungs, therefore common

SECTION ____ sense tells you that you should not breathe any dust. Now, the only problem is that the dust

The prevention of that is really harmful to your lungs is the dust asbestos diseases you can't see — the dust you see sometimes

when the sun shines into a darkened room. For a start you want to make sure your job does not produce dust you can't see. Call in the scientists to measure it for you. A recent report from the Industrial Hygiene Department of the British Steel Corporation concluded:

The risks (of asbestos) are very real, and maintaining the required standards of control in use, and in disposal may be costly. Every effort should therefore be made to substitute other materials for asbestos, as

any cost penalty may well be offset against the risk of disease, and the cost of main-

taining adequate precautions. Ideally one would wish to dispense with asbestos.

But as Dr P.G. Harries of the Naval Dockyard at Devonport has stated: 'Unfortunately, most of the (asbestos) substitute high temperature insu-

lating materials are very dusty, especially those

containing calcium silicate.' The evidence

presented below will show there are a lot of unknowns about the health hazards of asbestos substitues, but the medical and scientific evidence

suggests that almost without exception the substitutes are safer than asbestos. Of course the lack of real information has led the asbestos industry to jump on the bandwagon: better the devil you know than the devil you don't!

102

ANDARD After asbestos, sclentIst give glass fibre warning

'DEATH DUST' PERIL

— S M,d,,t .1

O,,rcoM,sr, nO,, h rt,

14n40,,: Moth4 IkoNqhfl 4 474

The answer to this problem is for workers and community groups exposed to asbestos to demand substitutes, but to demand the same precautions with these substitutes as for asbestos until they are proved safe, as none have yet been so proved. To give an example of the problems and lack of information we shall discuss the health hazards of glass fibre in some detail as it is a major replacement for asbestos. A recent review1 concluded:

Any durable fibre having the appropriate dimensions must be considered a potential hazard until proven otherwise.., there is urgent need for appropriate research... there seems little doubt that alternative materials (to asbestos) should be subject to thorough investigation.

Glass fibre health hazards Glass fibre has been produced since the 1930s, although production only really got going after the Second World War and, in particular, during the last few years when it has become a major replacement for asbestos. By the 1940s skin complaints (Dermatitis) had been reported in the medical literature by glass fibre workers. Currently it is thought that 1 in 20 workers ma become 'sensitised' and unable to work wit glass fibre or the resins that bind it. As early as 1945 chest complaints were reported and by 1960 this had been named 'fibre glass pneumoconiosis' or fibre glass lung scarring. The main chest troubles were asthma, pneumonia and bronchitis. Workers near others working with glass fibre also reported chest troubes: typical complaints were chest pain, troubled breathing, sore throats, pain in the nose, congested nasal passages and coughs. One recent medical report2 showed that a family of four — mother aged 40, father 48, and two children aged 8 and 11 — all suffered from these symptoms after the installation in their house of 1 D.C.F. Muir, Annals of Occupational Hygiene, vol 19, 1976, p.139. 2 t-L.H. Newball and S.A. Brahim, 'Respiratory response to domestic fibrous glass exposure', Environmental Research, voLl2, l976,p.201.

103

104

a central heating system where the ducting was lined with glass fibre. Even their 14-year-old mongrel dog suffered from breathing difficulties and was put down by a vet — while dying he had a massive pumonary hemorrhage with blood flowing from his nose and mouth. Glass fibre was found in the dog's lungs and also a cancer (Hemangiosarcoma) which had spread to the lungs. The mother had abnormal uterine bleeding in 1975 and this led to a hysterectomy and the finding that she had cancer (Adenocarcinoma). The authors commented:

The relationship of fibrous glass exposure to the Hemangiosarcoma in the dog's lung, that was responsible for its death, and a Carcinoma in a member of the family can only be speculative.

In 1972 fine glass fibre was found to cause the same, previously rare, cancer in animals as asbestos — Mesothelioma. Recent medical research3 has indicated that there may be a cancer hazard with small diameter glass fibre in humans and there is certainly a respiratory hazard (bronchitis). Further evidence that any fibre of similar dimensions to deadly asbestos may cause the cancer Mesothelioma has been provided by the study4 of a Turkish village. About 6-800 people live in Karain (which in Turkish means 'pain in the belly') and between

KJiRAIN (PAiN iN THE BELII

TWIN TOWN wirN

I-IIROSH'MA

11 3 DL. Bayliss and others, 'Mortality patterns among fibrous

glass production workers', Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol 271, 1976, p.324. 4 a Lawrence MeGinty, 'Cancer epidemic raises doubts on

mineral fihres',New Scientist, 18 May 1978;

b Geoffrey Lean, 'Fibres may cause cancer', Observer,

1 October 1978.

Carbon Fibre Carbon fibre, developed at the RAE Farnborough,was hailed in the early 1960's as a new wonder material —

seven times the strength of steel and a quarter the weight. Since its failure to replace Titanium in the Rolls Royce RB 211 Jet its fortunes have fluctuated. Although in the UK Courtaulds have expanded their production. What of the health hazards? Little is known. Some recent studies indicate that when worked a lot of visible dust is produced, but that this dust is not small enough to get deep into your lung where much of the damage is done. Tests on guinea pigs exposed to this dust have shown no health hazards but the authors caution, 'While no pathalogical effects have been found in the short term, only long term experiments can show whether carbon fibre is innocuous.' (Environmental Research vol 17 1978 p.276) Until these researches are completed workers exposed to carbon fibre dust should ensure that the dust is kept to a minimum by good work methods a ventilation to prevent themselves being used as guinea pigs.

1970 and 1974 twenty-four people died from Mesothelioma. The normal incidence of this cancer is around one per million, which points to there being an epidemic of this cancer in the village. At first it was thought to be due to asbestos, but now it seems to be due to volcanic silicates called zeolites which are similar to asbestos. More evidence not to mimic the fine nature of asbestos with substitute fibres. As the editor of a prestigious occupation health journal commented5 in 1976: 'Since the manufacture of glass wool of fine fibre diameter is a recent development, it looks as if we shall have to sacrifice a good many animals to the gods of science and technology before we know the truth.' This mounting medical and scientific concern about the health hazards of glass fibre and, more importantly, the fears of workers using it, led to the glass fibre industry setting up a research project to look into the hazards. The leading glass fibre and mineral wool industry' companies (representing fibres made from glass, rock and slag) who had been in business for thirty years, decided only in January 1976 to set up this 5- year research project to 'establish whether or not there are any occtiona1 cancer hazards

105

AIITIIDPJTY

5 'Oncogenicity of Fibre Glass', Archives of Environmental Health, vol 31, 1976, p.107.

106

for workers in man-made mineral fibre plants in

Europe'. There are serious limitations to this company research and they admitted that the unions had not been involved in its planning. As some delegates at a recent conference6 commented:

Astonishment was expressed that the possible health hazards of man-made mineral fibres had initially been taken up by management and the medical staff apparently without reference to the workers.. . It was argued that formal independence from industry was no guarantee of neutrality of science and research and also that, although research may be valid, it may not be fulfilling the aim of protecting workers' health.

In April 1977 the US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recommended a new safer standard for the allowed concentration of glass fibre dust in the air — very similar to the current white asbestos standard. Whilst not being satisfied with the evidence on the safety of glass fibre they did comment: 'fibrous glass seems to be considerably less hazardous than asbestos'. Perhaps the most important point was made by John Grant, Secretary of State for Employment, in reply to a

question in the House of Commons on 2 March 1977:

Any serious health hazard arising from the inhalation of these fibres is likely to take many years to develop. The research now being planned or undertaken is unlikely to yield definite results in the near future.

What do workers with glass fibre and other substitutes do in the meantime? It is obvious we must demand the same precautions as for asbestos. If, in five years' time, this research shows glass fibre to be perfectly safe we can always relax the precautions, but we cannot put the clock back and remove dust from people's lungs if the tests confirm its danger.

6 Workshop on the biological effects of manmade mineral fibres (MMMF), Annals of Occupational Hygiene, vol 20, 1977,

p.149.

Health risks of other 'safe' replacements for asbestos Even less is known about the health hazards of the other substitutes for asbestos. For instance, the Royal Navy Dockyard at Devonport were actively looking for replacements for asbestos in the late 1960s. A report published in 1969 showed that when 1aing with the asbestos replacement Calcium Silicate, very high levels of dust are produced. According to one recent report,7 'In a shipyard, studies were being undertaken of Calcium Silicate used as a substitute for asbestos; this arose because of questions by the unions of possible health hazards.' Again, tests

)/ after the material has been in use for many 4 1 years, and then only because the unions asked ) j for it! What if it is dangerous? Will they vacuum

( out the lungs of those workers who have inhaled L it? The same old story: workers being used as

guinea-pigs for the testing of anything industry sees fit to produce for profit without a thought ñ� 6c.NE-i -PI6s... to its possible danger to health. Below is some of the slight evidence that exists on some of the substitutes for asbestos:

Summary of health risk

General Name Maker's Name Medical Evidence

Ceramic Fibres Fiberfax Generally compared by the industry to Triton Kaowool (Carborundum glass fibres. Much evidence from corn-

Company) panies or scientists sympathetic to industry.

McKechnie Some evidence of cell damage (British Ceramics Journal of Experimental Pathology

vol 11972 p.190) and in animals the deadly asbestos ncer — Mesothelioma —

has been found (British Journal of Cancer vol 128 1973 p.173)

Vermiculite Mandoval Tested so far on only fifty rats — no asbestos type cancers (British Journal of Industrial Medicine vol 301973 p.167) No human data yet reported. Can be contaminated with asbestos; but Mandoval claim theirs is not.

7 Annals of OccupationaiHygiene, vol 20, i977, p.i52.

107

general name maker's name medical evidence

Perlite Tilling Has not been in use long enough for the Construction full effects of lung damage to show up.

British Company sponsored surveys (Journal of

Gypsum Occupational Medicine vol 18 1976 p.723) indicate no major lung hazard

The British but still recommend 'continued control Ceca Co Ltd of the dust to ensure exposures below

nuisance dust levels is essential'.

Saffil fibres CI Tests so far on only 40 rats (Anna/s of (alumina and Occupational Hygiene 19 1976 p.63) zirconia) have shown no lung scarring (fibrosis)

comparable to asbestos.

Ceramic foam Dow Dust produced no lung scarring (fibrosis) Chemicals in 50 rats tested.

(Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology vol 25 1973 p.l45(

There has been a recent report8 that many fibres look the same as asbestos under the microscope. The ones mentioned were Calcium sulphate (a major component of common plaster board), fibrous silicates, iron (oxides?), sodium and potassium chloride, zeolites and many 'organic' (that is, derived from plant products) fibres.

Until we know more about the exact effects of all these 'safe' fibres on the lung we should clearly treat them all with the same precautions as for asbestos.

Other fibrous dusts (such as nylon) have been shown to cause lung disease among the workers making these fibres. Synthetic fibres such as

'synthetic wood pulp' (Hoechst Ltd) which finds uses replacing asbestos as a pumping aid, in paper and so on, are claimed to be inert, but no studies have been reported. As a 'fluffed preparation' it is admitted that dust can be created and the makers suggest 'measures should be taken to avoid inhalation'.

, A.P. Middleton. 'On the occurrence of fibres of calcium sulphate resembling amphibole asbestos in samples taken for the evaluation of airborne asbestos', Annals of Occupational Hygiene, vol 21, 1978, p.91 and letter from A.P. Middleton to BSSRS dated 6 Ncvcmhcr 1978.

108

Highly magnified photo- micrographs of a calcium sulphate — a common component of plaster b brown asbestos (amosite) c blue asbestos (crocidolite) d a clump (aggregate) of calcium sulphate showing their similarity under the microscope. Are their health hazards the same? (Annals of Occupational Hygiene, vol 21, 1978, p.91)

From the medical and scientific evidence presented so far it is clear that most of the replacements for asbestos are safer than asbestos and should therefore be used to replace it wherever possible; and this means in virtually all applications.9 However, that does not mean that the substitutes are safe. Not enough research has been done on any of the substitutes and therefore workers with these replacements should demand the same precautions as for asbestos. Such demands will 'encourage' the manufacturers to carry out their duty under the 1974 Health and Safety at Work Act and pre-test their products before using workers as guinea-pigs. There is no doubt that some of the non-fibrous substitutes (such as Vermiculite and Perlite) will be a lot safer, although the dusts produced will possibly cause or aggravate bronchitis etc. —

something not to

9 'Asbestos characteristics, applications and alternatives', Eulmer Research Institute, 1 976.

109

4tm LJ _ IL... L4m, Safe substitutes for asbestos?

be ignored. Substitutes that are fibres (such as

glass, rock, slag and ceramic fibres) pose greater problems, for it is currently thought that fibrous material can do much more damage to your lungs. One immediate way to reduce consider-

ably this hazard is to make the fibres non-

respirable: the diameter of the fibres should be above 3.5 micrometres (0.0000035 metre) in the air you breathe when working with the stuff Such fibres would not get deep into your lung where most of the damage is done. This is

technologically possible, but in the rush to mimic asbestos the makers of these substitute fibres have cut down the size to get nearer the

very thin asbestos-type fibres.

Bearing these comments in mind, below is a list of the major substitutes for asbestos in most situations:

The substitutes for asbestos:

what they are and where to get them

Group Use Substitute (gf = glass fibre) (numbers refer to suppliers address in appendix 3 (P.268)

(a) Bulk Cavity and joint Saffil fibre 1,2

fibres filling; back-up Refrasil fibre 3

insulation; furnace Fibreroc 4

linings; valve and Sillite rock fibre 4

gland packing. Fibrefax 5

Triton KaowoOl 2

Ceramic fibre 6

Glass wool 7

Kerlane fibre 12

(b) Fibre Sheets and board; Calcium Silicate (GE) 8

reinforced asbestos cement; Saffil 1,2

boards, corrugated roof Fibrefax 5

sheets, sheeting; Triton Kaowool 2

slabs and pipes; guttering; Vacuum board 6

blocks cladding etc. Gyproc (Calcium sulphate) 9

Sillite Rock fibre 4

Newtherm (Calcium Silicate) 4

Therblock slats 4

Superglassfibre 4

Crown HT slab (gf) 7

Rigid duct insulation 7

110

Vicuclad (Vermiculite) 10 Insulite board (Vermiculite) 11 Kipblock (mineral fibre) 11 Kipsulate (Calcium Silicate) ii Keralne (aluminium Silicate) 12 Pyronap (aluminium Silicate) 12 Keranap (aluminium Silicate) 12 Amberex H.T. (asbestos free) 17 Cem-fil (gf) 7,25

(c) Corn- Use of asbestos Potrite (Magnesium, Calcium Silicate) 13 positions, to strengthen Darlington Magnesia 66 cements, other materials (Magnesium, Calcium Silicate) 3 adhesives, High alumina cement 14 castables Newtherm 800 4

Fiberfax cement 5 Moist pack cement 5 Plaster (Calcium Sulphate) 9 Triton Kaowoot mastic 2 McKechnie premix 6 Monocast casta 11

(d) Spray- 6 Cerano spray (ceramic fibre) 15 able Fiberfax (ceramic fibre) 5 Insulation Mandoval spray (Vermiculite) 16 McKechnie premix (Alumina-Silicate) 6 Limpet spray (mineral fibre) 26

(e) Matt, Rolls for Saffil 1,2 batt, insulating Ferrasil batts 3 mattresses material, hot face Gf bonded mat 4 and insulation, Sillite mat 4 blankets seals, gaskets, Triton Kaowool blanket 2 bedding layers, Ceramic fibre blanket 6 expansion joints, Crown 75 gf mat 7 stress relief in Kerlone ceramic fibre blanket 12 welding etc Fiberwall 5

(f) Shapes Pre-formed shapes Saffil 1,2 and from vacuum Refrasil 3 pipe and press methods; Fiberforrn 5 sections tubes; cylinders; Triton Kaowool 2 crucibles; cups; McKechnie ceramics 6 channles etc Darlington super magnesia 3

Paratemp 3 Newtherm 800 4 Rockwell Lafinus 4 Resin bonded gf 7

111

Substitute (makers name and address in appendix 3)

(gf = glass fibre)

(g) Woven Clothsand Marglasgf 18

fabrics textiles Glass cloths 19, 20 & 21

(see also Tyglas 22, 23

Eel for Fiberfax cloth 5

non-woven) Ref rasil cloth 3

(h) Flex- UsetocoVer Refrasil 3

ble tape cables and Fibrefax 5

and hoses against Gf tape 19, 20,22

sleeving high temperature

(j) Yarns, — Refrasil

cordage Gf yarn or twine and strong

(k) Paper — Saff ii F iberfax Triton Kaowool Ceramic fibre paper

Thermochem 770; 2, 300; and 2, 700 (note: Thermopac contains asbestos)

Refrasil 3

McKechnie rope 6

Glass rope 19

Triton Kaowool 2

Kerlane rope 14

Fiberfax rope 5

(m) Paints To cover Decadex firecheck 24

— dust asbestos and Coating paInt 2, 5, 6

suppres- other fibrous sing and products fire resistant

(n) Pro- — Nomex cloth tective Multitect (:10th

clothing

(0) Loose Cavity Vermiculite fill insulation Perlite

112

3

Group Use

(i) Wet Soft-board that felts can be moulded

when wet

Wet felt Moist felt Keralne HD

1,2 6

12

12

(I) Rope, Widely used

square for packing braid

1,2 5 2

6

21

22 27

16 31

Case one: The Isle of Grain strike

Firstly, imagine working day after day at some menial task, such as digging. When it's cold and wet you're cold and wet, when it's dry you're working in a sandstorm. Not very nice, you may agree. But you may not even know what you're digging for or why. You are spoken to as if you're a mental defective. You dream about making enough money to get out of this mess. Nobody gives two hoots about you, you're an easy-to- replace item on the books. Derek Cracknell, first TGWU steward on the Isle of Grain power station Site, letter to the Sunday Times 24 October 1976.

The Central Electricity Generating Board (CEGB) Isle of Grain power station in Kent is the biggest in Europe. As power stations go it is one of the better organised in an area notori- ously difficult for trade unionists. Throughout 1976 they had a bitter nine- month strike over the health haiards of glass fibre. All workers with glass fibre — and other mineral fibres

such as rock fibre — have benefitted from their struggle, both in terms of the belated research now being done and the unoffi- cial 'Code of practice' the

Factory Inspectorate now use for all mineral fibres. Before this strike they had not thought about the problem and classed such fibres as 'nuisance dust'.

In February 1976 fourteen insulation engineers employed by the sub-

contractors Cape, Darlington and Newall (CDN) were assured in writing by the company industrial relations officer that when they worked with glass fibre they would get protective clothing. When they asked for it they were sacked.After nine weeks of picketing the site

113

gates the Advisory, Conciliatory and Arbitration Service (ACAS) stepped in. ACAS considered the letter to have two interpretations and said, in effect, that the strikers would lose status on the gate if they did not compromise. The site stewards were also of this opinion. The men returned to work with protective clothing provided, but 46p per week was stopped from their wages for the clothing. The employers argued that if they gave some men free protective clothing they'd all want it.

In April 1976 AUEW Construction Section scaffolders working for another contractor —

Babcock and Wilcox —

struck for protective free

clothing against the dust in the boiler rooms, which were being lagged with Rocksil. Despite the fact that there was a site agreement to provide overalls for work in areas of rust, grease, oil, junk, mud and confined

spaces, Babcock's refused to supply the overalls. Three men were sacked in April, another twenty-five at the

beginning of June and by 15

June the entire workforce of 928 men had walked Out in

sympathy. During May the

shop stewards had explored every avenue to get the dis-

pute resolved. On 13 May the Factory Inspectorate were on site and voiced the

opinion that protective clothing should be provided.

114

They did not take dust

samples until 21 -25 June. The dust sampling showed

that the 'air in the immediate area surrounding the lagging was heavily contaminated with the dust'. In some cases the levels recorded were 30 times the soca/led govern- men safe/eve! of 10 milligrams per cubic metre of air.

The demands of the strikers were simple: 1 Reinstatement of the twenty-eight members sacked or locked out; 2 One back — all back, no phased return to work; 3 No subcontractors; 4 Continuity of employ- men t

On 14 September Babcock's agreed to provide protective clothing and to pay for it, after nearly one thousand men had been on strike for three months! But they also tried to impose other conditions:

1 More production,' 2 A Code of Practice (which amounted to more discipline); 3 A new bonus scheme; 4 Subcontractors with possible loss of jobs to those who were in dispute.

The CEGB have now taken Babcock's off certain parts of the contract — mainly pipe fitting and scaffolding. Despite Babcock's increas-

ing profitability (return on capital rose from 8.7 per cent in 1971 to 15.4 in

1976), they seem to have

been out of their depth on this contract and, as always, the workers suffered.

Agreed procedure won for safer working with asbestos

substitutes Towards Christmas 1976 the men went back to work. As Fred Baker, a local boilermakers' union regional official, commented: 'There is no victory for anyone: it is a common sense settlement on both sides.' But, as

already mentioned, the strike made the Factory Inspectorate think seriously about the health hazards of asbestos substitutes and to issue an internal memorandum to their inspectors on the subject. Equally important, by 12 January 1977, the Isle of Grain workers had

got a comprehensive site safety agreement from the CEGB on the working procedure for handling asbestos

insulation substitutes to minimise the dust.

CEGB working procedure for the safe handling of man- made mineral fibre insulation (January 1977) 1 This procedure will cover all man-made mineral fibre insulation (e.g. glass fibre, ceramic, slag wool, rock wool) and Calcium Silicate insulation. 2 The aims of these

procedures are to cut down, as far as possible, contact with such materials. As far as possible dust shall be cut down to 'ensure that its

concentration in air breathed by an employee does not exceed the time weighted nuisance dust TLV (Threshold Limit Value: this level may soon be lowered — see

below). 3 Routine measurements of this dust level will be carried out where these materials are being worked and in adjacent areas. These results will be made available to the workforce. 4 Thermal insulation materials shall be handled

by the methods which cause least dust. Scrap and waste shall be collected in impermeable bags and dumped in an approved place. 5 Wherever possible a

special enclosure will be provided near the workface for the cutting of thermal insulation. The enclosure will be fitted with suitable dust control equipment. 6 Dust control by local exhaust ventilation will be provided wherever possible and it shall be of an

type.

7 In order to limit the spread of dust open-mesh flooring will be covered with a layer of plywood or similar. Likewise scaffold boards shall be well fitted. 8 Work areas shall be cleaned by vacuum to stop spread of dust. 9 Areas where the 'safe' dust level is exceeded (so- called TLV — see below) shall be termed 'designated areas'. 10 Access to designated areas shall be restricted to authorised personnel only while lagging is in operation and until thorough cleaning is completed. 11 A designated area shall be identified by coloured tape and warning notices. 12 Persons exposed to airborne dust above the so- called safe level (TLV: 10mg/rn3) shall be provided with suitable dust respirators according to BS 4275 and these shall be worn.

F I

13 Persons working in designated areas long term shall be provided with protective clothing (from gloves to full protection depending on job done). Laundering facilities will be provided with special precautions. Lockers will be provided and vacuum cleaners to remove dust. Persons working in 'designated areas' short term will collect overalls and return them on completion of the work in the 'designated area'. 14 Scaffolding will be thoroughly cleaned down by vacuum or other appropriate methods prior to stripping.

Another important concern is: What is a dangerous level of dust?

The Isle of Grain workers had won a procedure that will benefit all workers with asbestos replacements if it is enforced. There are still details to be worked out with the union (GMWU) as to who will do the sampling and so on.

Isle of Grain glass fibre strike 1976 (Morning Star)

115

A safer Glass Fibre Standard The present UK standard for nearly all nuisance dusts (fine mica and talc apart) is 10 milligrams per cubic meter of air averaged over a normal 8-

hour workday or 40-hour week (a so-called Threshold Limit Value or TLV). In April 1977 the US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recommended1° a more stringent standard for 'fibrous glass' and also considered that, until more information is available, the standard should be applied to other 'man-made mineral fibres' (for example rock, slag and ceramic).

Recognising the extra health hazard that fibres pose they give two standards: a No worker shall be exposed to an airborne concentration greater than 3 fibres per cubic centimetre of air. The fibres counted are those having a diameter equal or less than 3.5 micrometres and equal or greater than 10 micrometres in length. (This may be compared with the current UK standard for white asbestos of 2 fibres per cubic centimetre of air. Clearly it is

thought that small diameter glass fibre may be almost as dangerous as white asbestos.) b The total dust shall not be greater than 5 mil-

ligrams per cubic metre, which is half the current 'safe' level.1 1

10 Criteria for a recommended standard occupational exposure to fibrous glass, NIOSH, April 1977. 11 For more details see: 'Glass Fibre — a safe substitute?', BSSRS pamphlet, 1979.

Case two: The fight for safer fire doors

To comply with fire regulations the tenants of a house

in London were informed during 1977 that the doors of their house were to be

fireproofed. They found that the substance to be

used contained asbestos.

Luckily they were partly aware of the dangers of asbestos and started asking around about whether an

alternative could be used.

116

One of the first letters they wrote was to their local council's environmental health officer, Mr B.J. Parsons of the London Borough of Brent, who assured the tenants that the asbestos insulating board was 'completely safe' provided the asbestos industry precautions, which he enclosed, were taken. The tenants were also threatened in the same letter with court action under the Housing

Act 1961 and repossession by the landlady. The tenants were not satisfied and

asked for a copy of the specifications for fire protection. They found that either plasterboard or 3/16" asbestos wallboard was specified, but the owner did not seem to want plasterboard used on doors because it darriages more easily. After more pressure and

letters, consultation with

the GLC Fire Prevention Service revealed that 'Supalux', an asbestos-free insulating board, was suitable. In this instance a 6mm board was used and the owner informed of the alternative. The local MP, Reg Freeson, generally supported Brent's position on the use of asbestos, but commented:

I gather that a new Code of practice is in preparation at the present and may, when finalised, permit the cladding of certain panelled doors with hardboard. Apparently, with the increased cost of labour, the cost of supplying new purpose- made fire check doors is not now a great deal more than that of modifying existing doors and the finished product is considered to be

aesthetically preferable.

Case three: NALGO workers win safer conditions with rockwool

Basildon council built its new office block, Church Walk House, in the record time of 9 months at a cost of £500,000. But they used rockwool as ceiling insulation, and when the time came for 150 NALGO members to move in they refused. They were concerned about the possible health haiards (skin trouble and cancer) from rockwool. The NALGO safety rep

refused to believe the assur- ances of management and manufacturers that it was safe. The Factory Inspec- torate were worse than useless. They told the safety rep their document on the hazards of rockwool was 'classified information' and covered by the Official Secrets Act. The safety rep got information from the TUC Centenary Institute of Occupational Health that showed that rockwool should be treated with caution. After the NALGO members picketed the new offices the council managers gave in and agreed to regular monitoring of the air and releases of the results, using the same 'acceptable' level for rockwool as for asbestos. This is a partial victory since the current 'safe' level for rockwool is that of a

'nuisance dust' — allowing a much greater concentration of dust in the air. (Evening Echo 29 September and 9 October 1978; and Hazards Bulletin No.14 December 1978 p.8)

Case four: Safer work procedures for use with glass fibre won by British Rail workers at D oncaster

The deadly effects and toll that asbestos has taken of workers building and servicing rail coaches has been described elsewhere in this booklet (p.37). Using the recommendations from Hazards Bulletin No.3

(which covered the Isle of Grain strike) and the local factory inspector they have demanded and to the following precautions for working with glass fibre:

1 The rail unit is worked on as far away as possible from other workers; 2 The open parts of the carriage (doors and ventilation openings) are sealed with polythene; 3 The area is thoroughly cleaned with an industrial vacuum cleaner; 4 All glass fibre is worked wet to Cut down dust. A cutting table is set up inside the carriage. As the glass fibre is cut the knife is followed with a vacuum nozzle; 5 Nylon boiler suits are worn with hood, elasticated wrists and ankles, goggles, masks and gauntlet type gloves. Impermeable plastic bags are carried to put small offcuts of glass fibre in; 6 Anyone who has to leave the carriage is vacuumed down as they are done at the end of a shift or completion of the job; 7 Shower facilities are available for all workers; 8 Only the workers doing the job are allowed in the carriages.

117

118

Demands for much safer working pro- cedu res it'ith ziass fibre do not Sr cmii unreason -

able when ompared mt-it/i these precautions that C1B. 1 -GE/U (('K) use (or cutting

glass fibre clot/i used in making resins. The a/ores amid the ta/i/c with

down drought exhaust extract jon. 1 i-en so time

tor it-as in ocised hr tlu divisional immcdical

o flicen. Dr —I .4 - Craigen

because his gloves u-crc

not coven/mg his sleeves.'

(CIBA-GEIG} (UK) Ltd. l95)

Chapter 6 Removal of asbestos dust

What is a 'safe' dust level? Asbestos was one of the first ever substances for which a so-called safe level (actually a so-called safe process in this case) was ever set. In some ways this set the thinking that there were levels of dust in the air that were actually safe. The first 'standard' for asbestos came from the 1930 UK Factory Inspectorate survey.1 This suggested that

In order to prevent the full development of the disease (asbestosis) amongst asbestos workers within the space of an average working lifetime, it is necessary to reduce the concentration of dust in the air of the workrooms to a figure below that per- taining to spinning.

The employer-dominated report that formed the basis for the 1931 Asbestos Regulations jumped at this, saying:

This report is based on one important assumption, namely, the existence of a critical limit of dust concentration below which workers may be employed without injury to health. . . the only working basis

suggests that the conditions of fly spinning carried on without exhaust ventilation may be regarded as the 'dust datum '2

1 Merewether and Price, 'On the effects of asbestos dust on the lungs and dust suppression in the asbestos industry', HMSO 1930. 2 'Methods for suppressing dust in textile factories', Home Office, HMSO, 1931.

119

120

Leaving aside the important fact that this 'safe level' or 'dust datum' only applied to textile factories, how on earth did you compare one process with another anyway? A very crude method, the sugar tube, was briefly described, but this method was out of date within six years.3 How safe was this 'safe' process anyway? Infor- mation given in the 1930 report shows that it allowed for one worker in three to succumb to crippling asbestosis after 15 to 19 years at the job. And that's called safe! No wonder the asbestos industry jumped at this official government standard. This was the 'safe' UK standard for asbestos in the air for 29 years — until 1960.

Of course other doctors and experts were applying their own 'safe' standards. Thus we find a standard industrial health textbook in 1957k suggesting, A rough but useful means of judging the

dustiness of a workroom is to look at the kJ / back of a girl's hair to see how much

( asbestos is caught there.

In 1960 the British Factory Inspectorate adop- ted the equally criminal5 American 'safe' standard of 1938, set as a result of a study of a group of asbestos textile workers. It studied the health of 541 North Carolina textile workers; but 150 had been sacked before the study because they were suspected of having asbestosis. Also the group contained hardly more than one worker in 10 who had been there more than ten years, while the 1930 UK report had established that the true rate of asbestosis did not show up for 20 years. The 'safe' standard based on this report was the US standard for 30 years and the UK standard for 8 years. It allowed for an exposure to asbestos in the air of about 15 times today's so-called safe standard.

3 'Selected written evidence submitted to the Advisory Committee on Asbestos 1976-77', HMSO, 1977, p.40. 4 TA. Lloyd Davies, The practice of industrial medicine, J.A. Churchill, 1957. 5 Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol 132, 1965, p.31ó; vol 271, 1976, p.152.

By the late 1960s it was becoming clear that a new 'safe' level for asbestos in working air would be required. All asbestos-related diseases were still high, and still increasing. The asbestos industry realised that the government regulations on asbestos would soon be revised. This time, unlike 1930, it did not wait for a government report: it published its own report6 under the aegis of the 'independent and authoritative' British Occupational Hygiene Society (BOHS). Practically all the industrial hygienists in the UK are employed by industry, none by the trade unions, and a few by government and academic establishments, so it is no surprise to find that BOHS is virtually a company front. Five of the nine members of its 'asbestos sub-committee' were actually employed by the asbestos industry. On the basis of a single study done by asbestos company doctors and scientists at Turner and Newall's Rochdale plant, this 'independent' committee came up with the idea that a level of 2 fibres of white asbestos (Chrysotile) per cubic ( -_ centimetre of air was acceptable. At this level 1 .. fN1 'they estimated that someone employed for 50 years stood a 1 in 100 risk of getting asbestosis. They decided that was acceptable. They also said they could say nothing about protecting the worker from the cancer risk — very convenient . for the experts, but it doesn't mean the cancer rti\\ risk disappeared. In 1965, three years before this _____ J committee reported, it had already been shown -----—- that cancer was responsible for over half the deaths from asbestos exposure. How 'convenient' to ignore it! The 1968 BOHS standard of 2 fibres per cubic centimetre of air became a world-wide standard, where standards of any kind existed. For instance, in 1972 the US government set their own (identical) standard and they stated that the BOHS standard 'was given great weight'.7 But worse was to come. In 1969, Turner's doctor, who had done the medical studies on which the BOHS safe level was based, was succeeded by a new Chief Medical

6 Annals of Occupational Hygiene, vol ii, 1968, P.47. 7 'Occupational Exposure to Asbestos', criteria document, US National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, 1972.

121,

122

Officer, Dr Hilton Lewinsohn, who re-investi-

gated the 290 workers Dr Knox had examined four years earlier. Dr Knox had only found 3 per cent (eight men out of 290) with signs of asbestosis. Dr Lewinsohn found nearly 50 per cent (140 or so). This was far more than could be accounted for by the four-year interval or improved X-ray techniques. Clearly there had been a serious error by Dr Knox, that would endanger the lives of thousands of workers with asbestos. What did Dr Lewinsohn do? He told no-one, it seems. Of course,we do not know if Turner and Newall were told. We do know they did nothing if they were. But in 1972 Dr Lewinsohngavea talk to a local medical group on how he kept asbestos workers under observation. The talk was published in a little- known journal in the industrial health field.8 Because the results were presented in a confus-

ing manner and in this journal, they made no impact, but fortunately, Professor Irvin Selikoff. in the USA, has a computer which picks up all the articles published on asbestos diseases. He raised these tigures at a public meeting and openly questioned the 1968 BOHS standard. Dr Lewinsohn was furious. He wrote to Profes- sor Selikoff in July 1973,

We cannot accept the implication that the publication allows doubt to be cast on the validity of the standard and are of the opinion that such a conclusion is unwarranted. You have used the information provided in order to launch what seems to us to be a political campaign in the USA aimed at discrediting our Hygiene Standard for asbestos.

Nearly all the above first came out in the 1974 Granada TV World in Action programme, Killer Dust: A Standard Mistake? In this programme Turner Brothers admitted that until 1972, of 285 men traced, 26 confirmed cases of asbestosis had been found. Of 28 men who had died in the original 290, seven died from lung cancer and three from Mesothelioma. Thus, instead of a few per cent, almost ten per cent —

8 H. Lewinsohn, I'he medical surveillance of asbestos

workers', Journal of the Royal Society of Health, vol 2, 1972. p.69.

one in ten — suffered asbestosis, and on that was set a 'safe' standard to cover millions of workers with asbestos the world over. More recent studies, and evidence to the Govern- ment's Advisory Committee on Asbestos,9 have confirmed these earlier results and suggest that as many as 1 in 10 workers may contract asbestos- related diseases at the so-called safe level of 2 fibres per cubic centimetre of air.

All this discussion of the fixing of safe standards shows: 1 How the asbestos industry sets its own standards; 2 How doctors and scientists are bought off to give official support to such standards; 3 How the government and unions go along with the fixing of such standards. Clearly then people have got to assume the worst in a society such as ours, where health and safety are second to production and profit for a few. This means setting your own standards. You, or your family, friends and children are the ones who will contract the diseases, so you should decide what, if any, is an acceptable risk.

Measuring the dust level

Basically, this means taking a sample of the air you breathe (and not a sample of what you would like to breathe) and examining it for its asbestos content. Simple enough, you might think: in fact it is not. First of all there is plenty of room for errors either way. Points to remember are a Positioning of the head which takes the air/ asbestos sample. You want it as near to where you breathe as possible. b It is important that the amount of air flowing through the filter head, which collects the dust, is measured at frequent intervals. Obviously as the filter gets covered with dust the amount of air flowing through falls off.

9 'Official safety limit for asbestos may put one in fourteen at risk', Sunday Times, 30 January 1977; Julian Pew's written and verbal evidence to the Advisory Committee on Asbestos in 1977. The Lancet, 4 March 1978, p.484.

12

AS8CSTOS SA!4PLING is RY )NPCUP.ATE

c The method used to count the dust must be accurate. Studies1° using the most common methods — the membrane filter method with optical microscope — have shown differences of almost 100 times among experienced laboratories. Equally important, this commonly used method may only estimate as little as 1 in 200 of the actual number of asbestos fibres present in the air.

There are other problems (such as transportation of the sample). All that is said for asbestos clearly goes for other dangerous dusts. The

figures given below apply to industrial situations: there is, at the moment, no environmental standard; although in effect one exists in Cork, Eire. The method used to measure environmental asbestos is more accurate and should be the one used for all exposures. However, it needs a bit more work done on it and is more expensive. The method used by the Factory Inspectorate, managements and other laboratories, is not so accurate but is better than nothing. The details of measurement and so on are given in publica- tions1 1 from the Health and Safety Executive.

10 a Annals of Occupational Hygiene, vol 19, 1976, p.215; b Annals of Occupational Hygiene, vol 30. 1978; c Duggan & Calley, Counting of small numbers of asbes-

tos fihres..'Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 1978. ii a 'Asbestos: hygiene standards and measurement of airborne dust concentrations', Guidance note EH 10, HMSO, December 1976;

b 'Asbestos', Guidance note MS 13, FIMSO, March 1978; c 'Asbestos-measurement and monitoring of asbestos in

air', Advisory Committee on Asbestos, HMSO. June 1978.

124

The 'safe' standard the government works to is the one which may allow 1 worker in 10 to get asbestos-related diseases. It iS: For blue asbestos: 0.2 fibres/mI when measured over any ten-minute period; (Crocidolite)

For other types 2 fibres/mI when averaged over a 4-hour period; short- of asbestos term exposure should not exceed 12 fibres/when measured over any 10-minute period.

Some explanation is required about short and long-term periods. Ten minutes is about the minimum sampling time. What the regulations say is that for blue asbestos at any time you cannot be exposed to more than 0.2 fibres! ml of air without protection. For white and other forms of asbestos you cannot be exposed to more than 12 fibres per ml of air at any time without protection. In addition, with white and the others you should not be exposed to more than 2 fibres per ml averaged over 4 hours. For example: Let's say in doing a job with asbestos the air you breathed was sampled and it showed you had received 12 fibres per ml of white (Chrysotile) asbestos for 10 minutes. In other words the maximum. Now let's imagine for the next 3 hours 50 minutes there was no measurable asbestos in the air you breathed. Your average exposure would then be: Concentration x time (mm) Total time (mm) or 1/2 fibre/mi

The sampling head is on this man 's shoulder and air is sucked through it by a small pump on his waist. (Health and Safety Executive)

125

120 240

0.5

126

Now, since a factory inspector is not going to take any action until it reaches 2 fibres per ml,

you will get no support there. To give another

example: suppose a job working with asbestos

exposed you to 4 fibres per ml for two hours. The average four-hour exposure would be:

Concentration x time (mm) 4 x 120 = 480

240 (4 hours) 240 240

= 2 fibres/mi

Therefore even though you were exposed for twice the government 'safe' limit for two hours, on a four-hour average you would be found to be only just on the limit. No action.

Because of the increasing evidence that there is

no safe level of asbestos, the US National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health

(NIOSH) recommended in December 197612

the following standard for all types of asbestos:

a For an 8-hour average: 0.1 fibres per ml. That is 1/20th of the current UK standard

given above. b Based on a 15-minute sampling period, a

maximum of 0.5 fibres per ml of air. That is

1 /24th of the current UK standard given above.

Further, the US NIOSH emphasises that this is

not a safe level; just a level that can be routine-

ly measured with the equipment available today.

The TUC in its December 1976 submission to the Government's Advisory Committee on

Asbestos13 argued for a Maximum Allowable

Concentration (MAC) of asbestos in the air of 0.2 fibres per ml. Whilst this is twice the US

recommended average of 0.1, because it is in

effect a maximum it is more strict. Clearly wherever possible you want it as low as possible. That is, go for the lowest figure.

12 'Revised recommended asbestos standard'. US National

Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, December 1976.

13 'Selected written evidence submitted to the Advisory

Committee on Asbestos 1976-77. HMSO. 1977. pill.

What are the asbestos dust levels at your workplace?

fibres/mi Dust concentrations at Construction processes: (or cc)

Asbestos spraying a with pre-damping (no longer done) b without damping

Demolition (de-lagging) c with good soaking 1 - 5 d using water sprays 5 - 40 e dry over 20

Using asbestos/cement sheets and pipes

Use of asbestos insulation j drilling: board (e.g. Asbestolux Turnasbestos Turnall LDR, Marinite and equivalents)

1 vertical (e.g. column casting) 2 overhead (e.g. suspended ceilings)

k sanding and surforming I scribing and breaking m hand sawing n machine sawing without good extraction:

1 jigsaw 2 circular saw

o machine sawing with good extraction p unloading deliveries of board

1 cut pieces 2 manufactured standard sheets

Get them measured (see p.270) and find out. The levels can vary so much it is difficult to generalise. Those given above come from the Health and Safety Executive's Technical Data Note Number 42: There is plenty of evidence that these estimates may be on the low side. Even so, compare them with the US recommended standards and the TUC recommended standards or even the government's unsafe level of 2 fibres per ml and you can see there is little you can do with asbestos without exposing yourself to dangerous levels of the deadly dust; even unloading the stuff We mentioned above that the standard method

127

510 over 100

f machine drilling g hand sawing h machine sawing without extraction

1 jigsaw 2 circular saw

I machine sawing with good extraction

less than 2 2-4

2-10 10- 20 less than 2

2-5 4-10 620 1-5 5-12

5 - 20 20 upwards 2-4

5-15 1-5

of estimating the numbers of fibres in the sample only measures a fraction of them. It's as though you were reading the daily paper with bad eyesight and could only see the headlines. That doesn't mean the small print is not there. Now, the method used (looking at the fibres in a light microscope under phase contrast conditions) can see only fibres with a length treater than 5

micrometres. How many shorter fibres are there? The following tables give you some idea.

Job done Number of fibres seen by standard method

for every 100 fibres seen using more

accurate method (electron microscope)

Cutting Calcium Silicate block 3.5

Mixirigcemeflt 1.2

Making brown asbestos blankets 29

Removal of pipe covering 5.9

Indirect exposure during application of insulation in an engine room 0.4

Textile Fibre preparation and carding 4 Spinning, twisting and weaving 2

Friction Mixing 2

Finishing 2

Asbestos cement pipe Mixing 2

Finishing 1

Pipe insulation Pipe forming 51

Gold mining 10

Miners 7

Source: Annals of New York Academy of Sciences vol 271 1978 pp.158, 345

What does all this mean? Well, for every 29 fibres recorded in the making of asbestos blankets by the light microscope method there were actually 100. For indirect exposure, for instance, a normal measurement may have given a reading of 0.4 fibres/ml when in fact you would have been exposed to 100 fibres per ml. In gold mining, using the standard method of measurement, you will record less than 1 in 10 of the actual number of fibres present.

128

A recent authoratjve study by Julian Peto (Lancet4 March 1978 p.484) on workers at Turner and Newalls has concluded, 'Fibre counts based on optical microscopy are likely to be less relevant than total counts by electron microscopy.'

The asbestos industry has tried to get round this by using its sympathetic scientists to claim that these small fibres are not important,'4 but increasing evidence'5 points to their hazard to health.

The measurement of dust levels clearly shows the benefits of substituting for asbestos. During 197316 some studies were done on the dust produced by machining Marinite asbestos- reinforced board and comparing these with the results from machining glass fibre-reinforced Calcium Silicate insulating board. Various machining jobs were tested — milling, sawing and grooving — and milling was found to produce the most dust. In this process the substitute produced 0.1 fibres per ml, and this dust was largely non-respirable. The asbestos Marinite board produced levels around 200 fibres per ml — 2,000 times that of the substitute, and about half these fibres were respirable.

Ventilation and extraction of the asbestos dust If you have to work with asbestos or another dust-producing substitute try to do it in a special enclosure fitted with efficient extraction. This was one of the demands won in the Isle of Grain strike for working with glass fibre and Calcium Silicate. Substitution of the dangerous material apart, ventilation is the major protection for your health when working with dusty materials. Remember though, it is second best to finding safer materials because no extraction system yet invented removes all the dust from the air you breathe even when in perfect working order. The sole purpose of an extraction system designed to remove hazardous materials (for example asbestos dust, glass fibre dust) from the air you breathe is to cut them down to a mini-

14 Paul Gross, 'Is short-fibred asbestos dust a biological hazard?', Archives of Environmental H ealth vol 29, 1974, p.115. 15 AN. Rohi and others, 'Asbestos content of dust encoun- tered in brake and maintenance and repair', Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, vol 70, 1977, p.32. 16 See references in J.W. Hill, 'Health aspects of man-made mineral fibres, a review' Annals of Occupational Hygiene, vol 20, 1977, p.161.

129

GE1 THE $tST ExTRA CT ION UNIT NOT TH CtIEPST

mum. The question iS: what is the minimum that can be achieved? The truth is we do not know. Few ventilation companies do tests of dust in the air after their equipment is installed; and those that do will not release the results. In the area of extraction and ventilation there are many cowboys, that is, sheet-metal workers who have set themselves up in an increasingly profitable area. Bluntly, many extraction systems are useless. As the Factory Inspectorate commented in their Annual Report for 1966: 'The so- called ventilation plant may amount to no more than an exercise in more or less complicated sheet-metal work.' Therefore it is vitally important that workers demanding ventilation and extraction make sure the equipment purchased is that which gives the lowest levels of dust or fumes. Obviously the cheapest, although it may look very complicated, may not be the best. Yet it is so often the cheapest that gets the tender if management have the say. Ventilation should be localised to the job you are doing. That is, the hazardous dust or fumes are sucked away from you before they enter the air you breathe. No system of ventilation or extraction is totally safe. A recent review17 commented:

There is virtually no information published

130

I. , . p. S

Special lighting shows up this leak from an extraction system right by the workers' nose. 1'Health and Safety Executive)

on absolute emissions of fabric filters in reducing the emission of fine particles of asbestos. This lack of information is unfortunate because serious occupational health problems may result from the common practice of recirculating air to conserve energy... there are a substantial number of fibres which penetrate the fabric filter... Therc is certainly a possibility that a human health hazard penalty could off-set economic advantages of recirculation of air from the filter.

General ventilation This is the type of ventilation you've got in your home: open the front window and the back door. Sometimes (for example the kitchen or bathroom) you may need to help the airflow along, especially on still days, with an extractor fan. This type of ventilation is never acceptable for any type of hazardous material such as asbestos and its substitutes. It is only acceptable for things such as heat and non-dangerous smells. Clearly all this type of ventilation does is dilute the hazard and spread it around.

17 American Industrial Hygiene Journal, 1975, p.595.

131

132

Fixed localised extraction equipment This is the most efficient: wherever possible use this type of equipment when working with dusty materials. Try and get all jobs made up on this type of equipment. Some jobs have to be done on site. Recently several types of portable equipment (drills, saws etc) have come onto the market fitted with extraction equipment. How good are they? Frankly we do not know. For the Factory Inspectorate do not do comparative tests and the information given with the equipment is very scanty. You will have to get a choice of these machines, see which one reduces the dust levels to a minimum on your particular job, is easy to use, and so on.

Fixed extraction equipment with and without exhaust yen tilation. a without exhaust: 2660 fibres/cc b with exhaust: 2.3 fibres/cc

A range of hand tools (drill, rip, saw, router, jig saws, orbital sander) fitted with exhaust equipment: Bosch drills, ELU rip saws, ELU plunging router, Bosch jigsaw and EL U orbit sander. (Trend)

Cutting with exhaust extraction fitted. (Asbestos Research Council)

133

right: High speed orbital sander fitted with extraction equipment. (Trend)

Drilling asbestos (or glass fibre etc) with vacuum equipment. Levels of dust in the atmosphere were: without extraction: 40 fibres/cc with extraction: 0.16 fibres/cc A good reduction but still above US proposed limits which are 0.1 fibres! cc. Beware that the drill does not go right through and contaminate the next room. (BVCLtd)

134

1 Trend MH65 rip-saw

50 x 3/8" Asbestolux cut in 10 mm.

1.1. —

2 Bivac ACL vacuuming up 41b of high fibre asbestos cement over 3 mm.

0.84 less than 0.02

3 BVC EV 21 drilling asbestos sheets

0.16 —

Note: with no exhaust above 40.

4 Superfine ? (Factory — 0.02 Ultimat lnspectorate

standard test)

5 Nilfisk 900g of flock and

2kg cement of white asbestos vacuumed off floor over 20 mm.

— 0.02

6 GA 70 - 73 — general exhaust

GB 733 emission below 0.01; VB 73 always less than 0.02

7 Norris less than 0.025 74511 and Ill

Trend: Stirling Way, Stirling Corner, Borehamwood, Herts (01-953 0711) Bivac: Beehive Works, Marsland Street, Stock port (061-480 3468/9) BVC: Leatherhead, Surrey (037 22 76121) Ni/fisk: Newriiarket Road, Bury St Edrnunds, Suffolk (0284-631 63) Norris.' Wellingborough Road, Rushden, Northampton (0933-58811/6

Efficiency of some of the better asbestos extraction equipment

Vacuum cleaner maker and model

Below are some of the figures the better makers give. Remember these are almost certainly tested under ideal conditions. Even so it can be seen that in the breathing zone, the only test that really counts, the levels are in general still way above the US and TUC recommended levels (tests 1 and 2).

Job done Asbestos concentration in air (fibres/mi) In breathing In vacuum zone exhaust

135

136

Note too that the most important test the Factory Inspectorate are concerned with is the emission of asbestos from the vacuum exhaust.

Very properly too, since it is no use having a vacuum cleaner which spreads the dangerous dust around, as an ordinary household vacuum cleaner would. The Factory Inspectorate have a rule of thumb which says the emission from the vacuum exhaust should be less than one tenth of the current 'safe' level (TLV). Since this is as of now 2.0 fibres per ml for white asbestos; the allowed exhaust level is therefore 0.2. Clearly, from the above table, even with filters ten times as good as this (0.02) it is possible to have concentrations in your breathing zone of above the US and TUC recommended levels. Having said all that, and bearing in mind the limitation of this type of test, clearly from test 3 there is a massive reduction in the amount of dust produced: from 40 to 0.16 — a reduction of over 200 times.

,t' c%JR, vi1W, IW1T1 mis Is 71f '-)' FFS.T(V PRQTC77cW/

General checklist for extraction units 1 Get new equipment which will reduce the dust to a minimum. Get the claimed level the makers say it will cut down the dust to written into the contract. 2 Get a written procedure for operation, cleaning and maintenance from the makers. Have people responsible for such procedures (a duty under the 1969 Asbestos Regulations). 3 Try to get visual checks (for example mano- meters) on extraction where possible, so that the operator can tell when the equipment is working. Do not allow machine to be operated without extraction. Have a procedure for replacing filter bags as this is a particularly dangerous job. 4 Have regular monitoring of the air with results available to the workforce. 5 Check that the dangerous dust is not going straight outside to the community. 6 Make sure the exhaust equipment used is Factory Inspectorate approved for use with asbestos, even when bein (e.g. glass fibre).

g used on other dusts

Fact0tl Act 969 TI-IE ASES1OS REG'-)

EXAMINATION AND

OF TIlO 'pE1SON OF EXHAUST

pORT4 COMP TEST BY VENT1LATI EQUIPNT

t. Name o Cupier in part i. from the addre

Addeem. if diffet

cmmit aa'P° DjejnguiShiflI $tnguthtng non and

name number or -

the

137

Some simple equipment to see harmful dust

The dust that does the real damage deep in your lung is dust you cannot see in normal lighting conditions. Of course dust and grit of the larger size should not be ignored since it can cause or aggravate bronchitis. The dust that does the deep lung damage to your lungs is that which shows up sometimes when sunlight beams into a darkened room. Use has been made of this effect uy the Factory Inspectorate to construct some simple equipment to show this dust up. Some of the photos showing dust in this booklet have been taken using this method.

This invisible dust will show up if the area where dust leakage is suspected or likely is illuminated by a high intensity beam of light. The dust cloud can be shown up shinning this light at it and by looking at this beam of light at an angle.

If you were to look straight at the bright light your eyesight would suffer and you would not see the dust. A camera can replace your eye. The test is very sensitive, especially if you use a

background as near black as possible is achieved.

The process is illustrated in diagrammatic form below and more details can be obtained from the Factory Inspectorate.

eIhhtbem - Lamp

I Shield Eye orCamera

Dust cloud (at any position round the light beam so long as the md cated angle is about iO)

138

Case one: Shop floor action wins glass fibre extraction

George Corbyn of Portsmouth UCATT described how shop floor action at an internationally famous yacht building company won improved ventilation. In yacht building the glass fibre bulwarks are 'sheared down' prior to sheathing in teak timber. Originally this was done with a wood chisel and mallet but the requirements of increased production led to a mechanical diamond grit tarplaner being used. This created a lot of dust, so the convenor stopped the job until the dust problem was sorted

out. In addition to goggles and a Martindale dust mask they got an industrial vacuum cleaner attached to the exhaust of the tarplaner — where most of the dust was coming from. The hose of the vacuum cleaner proved cumbersome. So a second operator was used to control the hose and enable the tarplaner to have better control of the machine. This method has been in use for three years with no complaints.

During 1977 the stewards pushed for the use of an 'approved vacuum cleaner' for use with asbestos dust, for dust counts and for X-rays. They also wanted hooded extraction fitted to

a grinder-sander used for grinding small Glass Fibre Reinforced Plastic (GRP) mouldings and are now awaiting a demonstration. They also use very small amounts of asbestos, under the following conditions:

1 Disposable gloves and dust mask worn at all times; 2 No power tools to be used; 3 Material kept wet when being worked; 4 Waste material disposed of in plastic bags which are marked: ASBESTOS WASTE. 5 We are also looking for suitable alternative materials to replace asbestos.

139

- _.__i 4 — Using the simple light- source method to show heavy contamination of dust when pouring asbestos from bag into drum. (Health and Safety Executive)

The Nibblertine (Gilbert Davis)

140

The Nibblertine: a new method of cutting fibrous sheets This machine cuts by using a contoured smooth edge blade which performs a punching-sheering action on boards fed through the head. Tests done by the asbestos industry in 1976 showed levels of 0.35 fibres per ml in the breathing zone of the operator when cutting Asbestolux. This is well below the government 'safe' level (see p.1 19) but above the TUC and US government recommended levels. All cutting must be done with an approved vacuum cleaner for asbestos attached. Because of the nature of the cutting process the machine may well be an advantage over other methods, but it does leave a ragged edge which has to be sealed for safety. (Nib blertine L td, Alliance Works, Lancelot Road, Wembley, Middlesex, 01-903 6611)

Chapter 7 Working with asbestos and its substitutes

Cleaning up asbestos dust the safe way. Note the air- fed masks (the only safe ones), impermeable overalls and special vacuum approped for use with asbestos. All got by TU action at C.A. Parsons. (R. Murdoch)

The most vital working practice is to do the job in such a way that the minimum amount of dust is created. This sounds easy. But is it, since you can't see the really dangerous dust? Obviously you want to get rid of the visible dust first, since removing this will almost certainly get rid of some of the more harmful invisible dust as well. After that you should try to use dust counts to guide you to the best procedures to use. Below are given some examples of negotiated procedures: they could all be improved.

Case one: AUEW-TASS members say clean up properly At C.A. Parsons in Newcastle until 1967 blue asbestos was used for packing the ends of small furnaces. The lab was cleared of blue asbestos at that time. But in 1976 AUEW-TASS members thought, to be on the safe side, the lab should be given a second cleaning. They themselves put forward the cleaning proposals: industrial vacuum cleaners approved' for use with asbestos, cover-all overalls

141

and special respirators with external air supply. The

company were not too keen and said that a filter mask

would be adequate. But as

one AUEW-TASS techni- cian commented:

The cleaning work has to be done and those working on it are the people who have to be satisfied with the safety positions. Anyway, who knows what is safe or unsafe?

A substantial quantity of asbestos was found. The TASS committee insisted that the asbestos levels be

monitored before anyone was let back in the lab. The

company said this would take weeks, maybe months — until they were told the lab would be closed until the air was tested, when the results were made available immediately following the weekend's cleaning. TASS

members were present

during the testing and were involved on discussions as

to how the results were

analysed.1

1 H. Murdoch, Asbes tos — follow our example', Socialist Worker.

24 July 1976.

Case two: Dockyard asbestos disease

Asbestos has been used naval ships since about 1830. and the Second World War saw a great increase in the amount of asbestos used in ships of all types. In August 1945, HM Chief Inspector of F actories, F actory I nspectorate, serif

the following letter tO the shipbuilding arid ship-

repairing rid us try: Asbestos Insulation aboard Ships

I am concerned by the considerable develop- nient during the war years in the use of asbestos, either alone or as part of a mixture, in the Shipbuilding and

Shiprepairing Industries, mainly for the purpose of heat and sound in-

sula ion, arid the aicorli- pariyiog or reas in the rimirriher of work ers

British Navy Code of Practice produced in 1970

42

exposed to risks of injury to health through asbestosis.

I would, however, emphasjse that, while the dust may not have any apparent effects at first, experience shows that, particularly if the workers are exposed to dust in substantial concentrations, serious results are apt to develop later, It is therefore important that, even if the work will be only temporary, all reasonably practicable steps should be taken to reduce the risks to a minimum.

He then suggested a series of detailed steps to take to minimise the dust: on board, although the Asbestos Industry Regulations did not apply,

air 'spirit' should be followed — good ventilation; damping down and clearing up of dust; provision of an 'approved' respirator and provision for the cleaning and storage of ame; no one to work un

protected when spraying as going on; no one under 18 to be employed on this work, etc. He continued

I may say that these' arrangements have been accepted by the Ship- building Employers' Federation and the Trade Unions concerned, and I therefore hope you will be prepared at

once to accept the precautions suggested. A.W. Garrett, HM Chief Inspector of Factories

Had these precautions been taken over 30 years ago we might not be seeing the epidemic of asbestos diseases now occurring among workers in the shipbuilding and repairing industry, Of course they were ignored. In March 1965 routine X-rays of 120 laggers in Devonport Dockyard revealed that over 1 in 10 had possible signs of asbestosis. This was con firmed in ten workers. A comprehensive study was made, mainly by Surgeon Commander PG. Harries, which revealed an epidemic of asbestos disease among shipyard workers. In four Naval Dockyards, involving 42,000 people, about 3.5 per cent, or almost 1,500, are said to have X-ray abnormalities consistent with asbestos

exposurel At Devonport in the ten years up to 1973, 156 men were awarded disability pensions for asbestosis. But the important thing is that most of these men only worked near those working with asbestos. In the same ten years there were 55 deaths from the deadly asbestos cancer — Mesothelioma The average age of death was 63 years (with the youngest aged 40) and the average length of time from first exposure to death was 39 years (lowest time 20). As with asbestosis,-only two of these deaths occurred in men who could be regarded as asbestos workers (one lagger and one sprayer). The rest just worked near asbestos workers or occasionally fitted and removed asbestos.2

The reason for this was found when they started doing dust counts in 1967.

143

Asbestos fibre concentrations (blue and white) were found as high as 2,000 fibres/mi while sweeping and bagging asbestos waste. in general the concentrations were 50-500 fibres per ml. As regards 'indirect' exposure, in monitoring a

process which involved

stripping blue sprayed asbestos, a level of 311

fibres per ml was recorded, but two decks above, a concentration of 30 fibres

per ml was recorded — 150 times the government's so-

called safe level.

British Navy Code of Practice for working with asbestos

By 1970 the British Navy had produced a Code of Practice 'Working With Asbestos' and was actively phasing out all asbestos.

The pamphlet recommended:

1 To keep asbestos work separate and away from other work; 2 ToimprovewOrk- methods and materials to reduce dust; 3 To protect all employees whether they work with asbestos or not; 4 To keep a register of everyone who is employed directly on asbestos work; 5 To provide protective clothing and equipment: personal respirators, plastic hoods and caps, green

nylon overalls, skull caps,

overalls made of rubber- ised fabric, gloves and

footwear; 144

6 To provide cleaning and decontamination arrangemefltS 7 To carry out regular dust sampling.

Apparently an increase in

pay was given to the men

for the discomfort of working with all this protective gear.3 We tried

to obtain more detailed information on those

procedures, but the Navy refused to be helpful, even though they published an unclassified report4 as

early as 1969.

There is a regular industry now in observing the diseases caused by asbestos

in shipyard towns. For instance, in Barrow-il?- Furness, 579 men have

been found with X-ray changes: 28 cases of the

deadly asbestos cancer

—Mesothelioma have been

observed, with another 8 cases under investigation.5

b0

If.

\' S

And in Belfast a study of 162 laggers first employed in 1940 showed that by 1975 122 had died when

only 54 would have been

expected to —68 extra deaths There are 40 more likely to die so the death toll taken by asbestos will be higher.6

1 Guardian, 24 June 1976. 2 Environmental Research, vol 11 1976, p.261. 3 Proceedings of the

Royal Society of Medicine, vol 63,1970, p.1041. 4 PG. Harries, 'The effects and control of diseases associated with exposure to asbestos in Devonport Dockyard', Thesis, London University, 1969. 5 Environmental

Research, vol 11, 1976, p.244.

British Journal of Industrial Medicine, vol 34, 1977, p.174.

0,i6l9

sO

Case three: Shipyard asbestos workers fight back

Since the introduction of the Asbestos Regulations in 1969 shop stewards at Swan Hunter's shipyard on Tyneside, Les Stephenson and Fred Webster, have

campaigned to get rid of asbestos from the industry. As Les says:

After eight years and without much support from the EEPTU our union we managed to achieve this. The last ship with Marinite board was built this year (1977).

Asbestos dust samples taken in October 1974 showed that even when drilling steel grounds through pre- drilled Marinite Roof Panels, with a portable hand- held vacuum in use, levels of 4.5 fibres per ml were reached. In 1974 a Code of Practice for the use of asbestos was agreed whilst the material was being phased out:

1 Everything possible must be done to use pre-cut rriaterial; 2 Extraction attachments must be used for drilling and jig sawing; 3 All extraction equipment shall be checked each

day, bags emptied if required, etc. Weekly recorded inspection of such equipment by a

responsible person;

4 Where hand tools are used all dust produced to be vacuumed up at once. 5 All waste to be bagged in special containers and under Safety Officers' guidance all waste to be properly dumped; 6 Wherever possible Cut- ting to be done off ship in special cutting area; 7 Where cutting on ship to be done, may be done in situ, with proper extraction, outside normal working hours; 8 Shop stewards to be consulted over difficult situations; 9 Procedure agreed by company and shop stewards; breaking it may result in disciplinary action.

Another dust survey done in 1976 showed levels during the drilling and sawing of Marinjte asbestos board to be around 5 to 7 fibres/mI, even when holding exhaust near the tools. A drill with built-in extraction was much better, giving levels below 0.05 fibres per ml. The Ironic thing is that as early as 1973 tests8were done on a replacement for Marinite at the Yard and the tester concluded:

The physical properties of the new material (glass fibre calcium silicate) are such that little or nothing would be lost by using it for bulkheads in place of Marinite while substantial gains in potential

health risks would be made.

There can be little doubt that the actions of Les and Fred 'encouraged' Swan Hunter to use this substitute, although as Les Stephenson cautions:

The new material being used is a limpet board which I gather contains calcium silicate and is manufactured by Darlington Insulation Co Ltd: what effect this dust has on one's health only time will tell. (Too true — see especially p.107)

In the meantime the precautions for asbestos should not be relaxed. Les

Stephenson knows of some four confirmed cases in the last three years, all electricians, who had worked in his department, all of whom died: Case 7 was an electrician who had a history of chest trouble and when he died it was found to be asbestosis. Case 2 was a Tyneside lecturer who died after working near asbestos. He served his apprenticeship as an electrician, left at the age of 24, and died 26 years later. Case 3 was an electrician who, after serving his apprenticeship went to an office position. In the past p roving liability on one specific company was difficult. In this case we thought we had a concrete case; the man concerned

145

had been all his life with the Swan Hunter Group. This case was settled out of court because it was found when going through his records that he had lived in a prefab house from 1939 to 1946, made of asbestos board, and

this would have been detrimental to his case. Case 4 is of an electrician who recently died. The EEPTU are proceeding with his case but the fact that he

worked in other establishments is causing problems.

8 K. Speakrnan and A.J. Majumdar, Health Aspects of an Asbestos Board Substitute', Building Research Estab-

lishment,

Case four: US Shipyard workers

fight back

It is known that large amounts of asbestos have

been used in the fabrication of ships in the US during the last forty years. In the autumn of 1976 the unions at Mare Island Naval Ship- yard, California, became concerned about the health of their members. The local asbestos union branch (Asbestos Workers Local 20, Long Beach) and the Federal

Employees Metal Trades Council sent 25 chest X- rays of Mare Island asbestos

workers to the well-known asbestos expert, Professor Irvin Selikoff, for analysis.

146

Professor Selikoff found that 17 of the 25 X-rays showed

signs of abnormality consistent with asbestos-

induced lung diseases. The original X-rays had been in

the possession of the Navy but it had never told any workers they had lung disease. As Dr George M.

Lawton, a Navy Captain, responsible for Occupa- tional Health and Preven-

tative Medicine, commented:

If I order an automobile and the way they make automobiles is to throw people in the furnace, I am not responsible for that.

The unions pushed for a

bigger survey by Dr Philip

Only four out of ten US respirators 'approved 'for use with asbestos were found suitable. (US Navy)

A portable table with downdraft exhaust from an asbestos approved vacuum cleaner is used. It catches a lot of the saw cuttings — but note that a face mask is still used to be on the safe side. (US Navy)

L. Polakoff, of Herrich Memorial Hospital, California. The results

became available in July 1977. Of 359 Mare Island shipyard workers (boilermakers, electricians, insulators, welders and

laggers) who were first exposed ten or more years ago to asbestos, 213 (59 per

:)'

cent) had abnormal chest X-rays 'compatible with asbestos-related disease'. The Californian Unions have described this epidemic of 'white lung', as they call it, as 'the largest peacetime genocide in history'. As a result of these studies, the Unions are pushing for guaranteed compensation and tough legislation. They want9 removal of asbestos from the workplace and a

comprehensive 'medical surveillance program' by Dr Polakoff.

a registry of emp/oyees All employees who have worked in the shipyard (civilian and Navy) since World War II. To include: full name, current address, telephone number, social security number, date of birth and employment history. It will be compiled from company and union records.

b an educational program for workers to make them aware of the risk, the value of medical tests and the added danger of smoking with asbestos exposure.

c cooperation with local doctors Thiswillbe developed as the program will depend a lot on this. d periodic medical examinations to include: for workers with less than 20 years exposure:

a yearly examination, b chest X-ray, c lung function tests,

d SMA-12 blood test, for workers with more than 20 years exposure also e sputum cytology — more often than yearly for smokers, f tests of urine and stool for occult blood.

e handling of data, follow-up and written reports (including results of tests and X-rays) will return to regional resource centre for analysis. Results will be given to each worker.

f maintenance of record& The regional resource centre will keep all medical records.

Some details10 have been given of the US Navy control program me for asbestos. The major points in the control programme are:

a adequate respiratory protection; b change in work practices and handling methods; c engineering controls such as ventilation; d an educational programme to retrain workers to use less hazardous materials; e substitution of less hazardous materials; f a monitoring programme. More details are given in the article, and some particularly important points are:

1 A survey in January 1968 found that three out of four men did not wear their respirators; poor face

fit, difficulty in breathing and lack of comfort were given as reasons. A survey

was done of the ten best approved respirators and four were selected on the basis of good face fit, good visibility and ease of breathing through. This shows the need for choice in a respirator.

2 Ventilation controls are difficult but can be done if care and effort is taken.

3 Substitution of asbestos with glass fibre, synthetic rubber foams and, in particular ceramic foam has been successful in many areas.

4 A detailed list of changes in work procedures is given: pre-wetting (Cuts dust down by half); ventilation where- ever possible; plenty of waste containers about for scrap etc; cutting instead of ripping out during stripping; sealing of areas; much use of approved vacuum cleaners and so on. 5 Treating the workers as human beings by telling them what the effects of asbestos are, what should and can be done and why, and asking them for their opinions and suggestions resulted in many changes for the better.

9 P.L. Polakoff, 'Asbestos-related disease amongst shipyard workers', Metal Trade Council, Ma1e Island, California, 1977. 10 'Asbestos exposure control at Puget Sound Naval shipyard'• Environm.nl Res.an,h, vol 11, 1976, p.248.

147

right: Magnesia pre-formed insulation is sawed under controlled vacuum conditions off ship where possible — note they use face mask still. (US Navy)

Case five: Dockers fight asbestos

Early in 1964 some dockers in Surrey Docks, London, went to see one of their mates in hospital and

learnt that he had asbestosis.

As a result the branch, Number 3, blacked asbestos

and called for a total blacking of asbestos. This became official union policy in the London Docks in 1967. Harry Walker, a TGWU member in the Port of London West India Dock, first became concerned about the health haiards of asbestos when he read about the African women and

148

children dying from asbestos

diseases near Rhodesian asbestos mines. At that time he was working on asbestos

from Rhodesia. At his branch he moved that unless

asbestos was properly bagged,

palletised and wrapped in

polythene, it would not be

worked. The employers offered lOp an hour on the normal rates, overalls and a

bucket of water to wash their hands in! Not satisfied,

Harry Walker pressed for a

meeting with union officials and doctors. The TGWU union officials assured the branch that the asbestos was

safe, as did the Port Medical

Officer in a Circular. But at

the meeting was Dr Murray, the TUC Medical Adviser at the time, who was asked the following question by Harry Walker 'Would you person-

ally handle asbestos?' Dr Murray replied: 'Handle it? I would not go near it.' From then on asbestos was

blacked in the PLA West

India Dock. One London docker, John

Challingsworth, TGWU Branch 1/6, who is certified as having 10 per cent asbestosis, has written an

open letter to other do k

workers Dear brothers, and I

Insulator wearing approved respirator, disposable paper overalls and showing close location of plastic refuse bag.

mean that to incorpo- rate every port worker not only in the UK but throughout the world. I write as a confirmed asbestosis case. - .My own particular case came to light through a visit to my doctor through a chest cough and exceptional loss of weight (one stone) in August 1967.. .specialists confirmed I had asbestosis and with great help from the legal depart- rnent of the TGWU I succeeded in extracting 10 per cent disability pension from the Ministry.., brothers, you have got a fight on your hands, believe you me, if unfortunately you are thought to have the disease. It did not show itself in my case until after a ten- year lapse.

I will leave it to your own conscience to understand the highly dangerous situation, healthwise, you leave yourselves and your loved ones in, if you still handle asbestos.

Imports of asbestos into Britain were 139,000 metric tons in 1975 (down from 168,000 in 1971)and came in mainly through the

following ports:

Thousand metric tons 53.7 25.3 12.9 9.9 9.8 8.2

19.4

Source: Parliamentary

question by Mrs Bain, Hansard 5-Il March 1976

Conditions at other ports are bad. As Ritchie Pearce, Chairman of Southampton Docks Shop stewards committee commented in 1977: 'We've worked on cargoes in the past when it's been falling like snow around us. We recently had a case when a Southampton docker applied for ajob in Saudi Arabia and got turned down on health grounds. He had asbestosis and he's only 43.' Why haven't they followed the example of London and banned asbestos? In some cases they have tried, and a few days later been approached by the con- venors of asbestos factories on bended knee saying that such action will put hundreds of workers out of jobs. And good trade unionists wouldn't want to do that would they? Your money or your life.

149

WNt'ON D7CK&S EI4N 4S&ES-rOs. SO(11HA'I?iZ'N ikx$

Z'O NO'.

Manchester Liverpool Southampton Avonmouth Tilbury Lowestoft Other ports

150

Servicing brake and clutch linings 'Is brake lining dust harmful?' asks a leaflet from the asbestos industry front organisation, the Asbestos Information Committee. 'No', answers the leaflet; unless you do a lot of it and

then the recommendations in their sister organisation's pamphlet1 are adequate to protect your health. Is this true? As early as 1965 UK 'official'

figures2 (and therefore underestimates) showed that out of 247 cases of diagnosed asbestosis

during 195 5-63, four gave their main occupation as brake liners. The deadly asbestos cancer —Mesothelioma —

has been shown to occur in garage workers, even

among those whose hobby was re-lining brake and clutch linings. By 1976 researchers at Profes- sor Selikoff's laboratory in the US had conducted a preliminary survey of 90 New York

garage workers (mainly general mechanics plus a few panel beaters, painters and lubricators). They found3:

Over one quarter of a group of experienced vehicular maintenance workers examined had evidence of X-ray abnormalities consistent with asbestosis; one quarter also had restrictive pulmonary function test findings.

Clearly then there is a real and serious health hazard to motor mechanics.

Asbestos brake shoes were first used in cars around 1910 to replace the woven cotton textile ones used at that time. This has allowed the

present high speeds on the road. By 1963k the

possibility that asbestos was 'A Modern Urban Health Hazard' was noted. In 1968 the hazard was investigated5 by an

engineer working for the US Cincinnati Public

1 'AsbestOs-based friction materials and asbestos reinforced

resinous moulded materials', Asbestosis Research Council, Guide No.8. 2 Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol 132, 1965, p.128. 3 The Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine, vol 43, 1976,

p107. 4 South African Medical Journal, 19 January 1963, p.77. 5 Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, vol 18,

1968, p.824.

Grinding brake shoes. (Dr F.D. Trevarthen)

Health Service. He found that although the original brake shoes contained 30 to 50 per cent of white asbestos, the dust generated on braking contained less than one per cent fibre, therefore 'free fibre from brake lining wear seems to be an inconsequential health factor in urban air pollution.' He also concluded that most of the decomposition product was non-fibrous, and later authorso from the asbestos industry suggested this was the non-fibrous 'fosterite'. So everything was OK, and the asbestos industry made much publicity out of this research. But recent research7 has shown that asbestos in the brake shoes is not broken down to a non- fibrous material. In fact it seems that the last thing the asbestos brake-shoe industry want is this 'fosterite' as it is very hard and scores and gouges the brake drums and discs, so they add

151

6 Annals of Occupational Hygiene, vol 13, 1970, p.17. 7 Atm ospheric Environment, vol 10, 1976, p.583.

Ford's vacuum brush method of cleaning off asbestos dust from brake shoes. Recommended in acadt c journals as early as 19). But still not in common use. (Ford Motor Co)

152

'reconditioning agents' to prevent its forma-

tion!8 They claim asbestos is being broken down to a 'safe' non-fibrous substitute and all

the time they are breaking their necks to get rid of this safe substitute and back to the good old killer asbestos. Talk about having your cake and

eating it! Furthermore, nobody even knows if this non- fibrous 'fosterite' is safe. Fords promised9 animal tests in 1969. None were done, it seems, as in 1976 Dr Gilson, then head of the Medical Research Council's PneumoconiOSiS Unit com- mented1° pathetically

One of the major sources of asbestos pollution in the urban air was likely to be dust from the brake linings of vehicles. Fortu- nately, the asbestos is one of the least biologically active, and undergoes a struc- tural breakdown during braking which is said to be inert. There is a strong case tor examining this dust for biological activity, but it should be done by the industries or industrial associations concerned.

Some hope! And what type of results would we

get if they did? But there again Dr Gilson is

only showing the faith he has always had in 'responsible' industry. It is doubtful whether his faith is shared by the thousands of sufferers from asbestos diseases.

8 EnvironmentalResearch, vol 12, 1976, p.110. 9 Annals of Occupational Hygiene, vol 13, 1970, p.20. 10 Guardian, 24 June 1976.

right: Blowing.off brake dust containing asbestos (a dust sampler is pinned to the man's lapel). (A.N. Rohi)

below: Bevelling truck brake linings. The arrow shows accumulation of deadly asbestos dust. (A.N. RohI)

'-I

I w

In 1970 investigations by the Ford Motor Company showed that peak asbestos dust levels of 87 fibres per ml (seven times today's allowed 'safe' peak level) could be reached when blowing- off dust from brake drums. Punching, riveting and grinding could lead to levels as high as 29 fibres per ml. They suggested a vacuum brush method of cleaning brake shoes which cut the peak sample down from 87 to 0.6 fibres per ml. By 1977 more complete sampling11 had shown that most of the dust formed was too small to be picked up by the sampling method used before. Up to 80 per cent may not be visible in the standard test method. Using the standard test method, they found that 'blowing-off' could give levels as high as 29 fibres per ml. The bevelling of truck linings could lead to levels as high as 72 fibres per ml. Even at a distance of 25 ft or more (9.1 metres) the levels were 0.3 fibres per ml, above the recommendation of the US Health Agency and the TUC. Drilling, grinding and riveting led to levels as high as 29 fibres per ml.

11 Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, vol 170, 1977, p.32.

I'

F.

I 153

154

Recommendations for a safer procedure for servicing brake and clutch linings. As a result of these studies the US National Institute for Occupational Health and Safety (NIOSH) has recommended12 the procedure outlined below. Some American unions (e.g. United Automobile Workers Local 259, New York) have issued similar instructions to their members. 1 Areas where brake and clutch servicing is done shall be separated from the main working area and posted with asbestos warning signs:

Danger asbestos dust hazard

Avoid breathing dust

Breathing dust leads to incurable lung disease (asbestosis) and lung cancer

Do not remain in the area unless your work requires it

2 After wheels are removed and during re-

assembly, and before removing brake drums or clutch housing, the mechanic should wear a

respirator approved for use with asbestos dust.

3 Suitable (see photos) and asbestos-approved vacuum equipment should be used for cleaning Out asbestos dust. Compressed air should never be used to blow off asbestos dust. After vacuum

cleaning any remaining dust should be removed with a rag soaked in water and wrung nearly dry. Make sure the rag, after use, is not left around to dry out and spread the dust around. Put the rag in a plastic bag and dump it in an approved manner.

4 As much stripping, drilling, sanding and so

on as possible should be done in the place of manufacture. It is far easier to take adequate precautions in a specialist factory than a general workshop. 5 Any drilling, punching, sanding and so on that has to be done in the workshop must be done in the approved area using approved extraction equipment suitable for asbestos dust.

12 interim procedure for asbestos brake and clutch servicing, US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Current Intelligence Bulletin, 8 August 1975.

One type of extra ction equipment that makes the cleaning of brake drums safer. A corn pressed air line blows off the dust and it is collected by a vacuum cleaner approved for use with asbestos. (BVC)

6 All cleaning in the approved area will be done with an asbestos approved vacuum cleaner. Fitters and others working with asbestos shall have correct protective clothing, changing rooms, laundry facilities, and so on. 7 Personal and fixed air sampling shall be carried out periodically (e.g. monthly) to determine the effectiveness of these measures. Regular medical checks shall be done on workers in contact with asbestos with results available to the workforce. In 1976 Mr Anthony Mandelle, former managing director of Cape's asbestos factory in Barking, London, commentedl3:

It would be commercially reasonable to introduce automation. Instead of brake linings costing £5 they might cost £8, but after all the market price is determined by the demand. You are dealing with men's lives. You must pay in money and not men's lives.

13 Guardian, 31 March 1976.

155

156

The type of vacuum equipment that is best for

keeping the asbestos dust to a minimum should be determined by both the workers' opinions and checks on the dust levels. We have heard

reports of managements, under pressure, givin one bit of extraction equipment to a garage wit no instructions on its use, on changing of the vacuum bags and no revision of the bonus

system and so on. Clearly if the job takes longer using the equipment the bonus must be re-

negotiated. In the US one automechanic, Nelson O'Connor, has gone further and designed14 and

patented his own 'Kleen Air Brake Dust Collec- tor' and he is trying to interest manufacturers.

A new type of brake shoe cleaning unit, the 'Gerni Pony Brake Washers', has come on the British market in 1978. This unit uses a mixture of degreasing fluid and water to flush off the dirt and dust. Whilst there is no doubt that this unit is better than blowing out the shoes/hubs/ clutch housings, there is no evidence as to what level this machine reduces the asbestos dust level down to. Further, the degreasing agent may be harmful to lungs and skin. This unit is favoured

by management because it is cheaper than extraction units, but beware.

The implementation of these and other safety procedures for working with asbestos in garages should reduce the incidence of asbestos diseases in garage workers. It is not known if it will eliminate the hazard entirely, but what it will do is make brake and clutch manufacturers more active in finding substitutes. As early as 1969, Mr D. Hatch, of Ferodo said 15

it cannot be said that the use of asbestos in disc brake pads remains a technical necessity, and it is in this field of friction materials that some departure from resin- asbestos based composites could occur in the next few years on technical and performance grounds.

What happened? There has not been enough pressure on the manufacturers to force them to market safer substitutes. Alternatives have been

14 Monitor, vol 3, No.6, 1976.

15 Annals of Occupational Hygiene, vol 13, 1970, p.26.

found for Concorde and some racing cars and will be found for all such uses if forced. Dunlop have already developed metallic-type friction brake pads that perform better than asbestos equivalents for motorcycles. The largest US friction brake pad manufacturer, Raybestos- Manhattan Inc., has indicated in its 1977 report to its shareholders that 'due to escalating costs and continuously revised government regulations' the company believes it is in its best interest and those of its customers to get out of asbestos. They expect to do this gradually over the next few years.

Case six: British Rail

British Rail have used a lot of asbestos over the years, mainly to insulate their carriages from noise and so on. Conditions for the men making and servicing these carriages seem to have been appalling. In 1975 a solicitor was claiming1 that an en tire team of eight whose job it was to spray asbestos onto British Rail carriages had died. Judging from the deaths that have occurred in York among workers at the British Rail works in the town the solicitor may well have been right. Two recent deaths, David Bull aged 47 and Brian Kings aged 39, bring the known total to six in the past two years.2

Compensation for asbestos victim's 'lost years' From 1949 to 1974 Ralph Picket worked at the British Rail Eastleigh works, Hants. During the day he

had to work fitting panels and furniture in carriages where there was a layer of asbestos dust that had been sprayed by the night shift. Ralph Picket was a non- smoker. He was a very fit man, a cyclist of Olympic standard who cycled to work each day until March 1974. He had a wife and two children. He was aged 51 in 1974. In the spring of that year he became short of breath. He underwent medical examination and and operation in January 1975 revealed that he had the deadly asbestos cancer Mesothelioma The cancer could not be removed completely and the operation left him wearing a corset as the nerves controlling his stomach had been severed. He was given less than two years to live. In July 1975 he started court proceedings to claim damages from his employer — British Rail. In October 1976 he was awared the following damages:

General damages for loss of amenities, pain and suffering £7000.00 Interest on the above £7000 at 9% since service of writ: Sum for loss of earnings:

Sum for loss of expectation of life:

£ 787.50

£1508.88

£ 500.00 This amounted to a grand total of £14,947.64. The going rate for a life in 1976 was less than £15,000 it seems. Four mont/is later Ralph Picket was dead. He died on 15 March 1977.

Before he died he appealed. The appeal was heard after his death in November 1977 and the £7000 award raised to £10,000. But no interest was awarded on that sum. His widow appealed to the House of Lords. She claimed that the sum for loss of earnings was too small (fl508). On 2 November 1978 the Lords gave judgement.They reduced the lump

157

sum from £10,000 back to £7000. but did give interest. More importantly, they decided that the sum for the 'lost years' was too small. The final sum has yet to be

decided but there is no doubt it will be much

greater than the insulting £1508 previously awarded for the loss of earnings of a

fit and active 5 1-year-old.3 British Rail have made no efforts, it seems to trace other workers from the factories to check on their health. This neglect is

criminal. Drivers have reported blue asbestos

fibres floating in their cabs4

and measurements of blue asbestos in cabs and carriages show levels of 0.008 to 0.012 fibres per ml (letter from BR to Sir Bernard

Braine MP) which, although below the government so-

called safe level, are well above the background levels

and indicate a very real

health hazard.

It appears that in the short term British Rail may well seal off the asbestos surfaces

and blank off the ceiling ventilators into the passen-

gers compartments (not the driver's), but in the long- term BR is stripping the 7,000 of its 17,000 passen-

ger coaches insulated with asbestos.

1 Daily Telegraph, 10 October 1975. 2 Guardian, 21 October 1977. 3 a Daily Telegraph, 13 October 1976;

b 'inflation casts a

shadow over damages awards, Financial Times. 13 November 1978. 4 Daily Telegraph, 28 June 1976.

DoNr IF YOUt POT M0RTEM'5

YOU'LL (!E if'! FOPS 5OME COMPE J5TION

58

British Rail work methods

According to BR16 the following methods are in

operation at 17 special 'asbestos houses':

1 These 'asbestos houses' are essentially sealed

sheds fitted with high powered extraction and filtration systems so as to maintain the air flow from clean to dirty areas;

2 The men work in PVC wet suits with positive pressure or air-line respirators and pass through shower facilities and air locks after working sessions to changing rooms and equipment rooms; 3 Regular air sampling is carried out both inside the suits and in the clean areas and dirty areas. There are also regular fibre checks of

16 letter from Dr R.l'.G. Dickerson, Group Medical Officer

for British Rail, to I3SSRS, 7 April 1977.

exhaust air to ensure no pollution to the neighbourhood (but see p.128); 4 The standard applied to blue asbestos is 0.05 fibres per ml (that is one-quarter of the Factory Inspectorate 'safe' level), and the level of 2 fibres per ml for white asbestos is taken as a ceiling level (that is one-sixth of the current ceiling level), above which action is taken under the 1969 Asbestos Regulations According to one report17 the men working in these sheds get an extra £10 a week. They deserve it! But reports vary. One worker18 at the Doncaster 'asbestos house' said they were paid an extra lop an hour — £4 a week. On top of this, because of congestion and poor lighting in the 'asbestos houses', carriages are going out with asbestos still in them, men in other departments are refusing to work with them, and at that time the 'asbestos house' men were on a work-to-rule The accusations that the 'asbestos house' at BR Doncaster is not effective have been confirmed in a report by the TUC's medical adviser, Dr Ronald Owen. The report was made in June 1977 and BR engineers released it to The Guardian in December 1977.19 The supposedly elaborate procedures are not working. As one shop representative at Doncaster said: We have found lumps of asbestos as big as dinner plates in the heating ducts. What worries us is how much is getting through that we don't see and going back out to traffic. Once the heating gets going it will

dry out and be discharged everywhere. Clearly both the public and BR employees are at risk. The workers have lost money by refusing to work on contaminated cars and sending them back to the 'asbestos house', because they are paid by piece-work. In May 1977, after a dispute lasting ten weeks on this issue, 25 workers travelled to NUR headquarters in London and accused the union of a conspiracy of silence to protect jobs. These workers need the support of other NUR and ASLEF members and all who

17 Guardian, 22 March 1977. 18 Socialist Worker, 14 May 1977. 19 Guardian, 9 December 1977.

159

160

use the railway. As Dick Holden, a fitter at BR

Doncaster added: The management's attitude is that we are

over-reacting. But it is a justified source of

anger. You feel angry when your friends

die. We have to accept certain levels of risk;

there are risks in all industries. But we

resent British Rail telling the press that 'we've cracked it' when clearly they haven't.

Sealing and stripping asbestos

In general both the TUC in the evidence to the

Advisory Committee on Asbestos2° and the

Factory Inspectorate21 favour asbestos sealing rather than stripping. But sealing is second best,

because the asbestos is still present. No work has

been done to see how effective these seals are

after a few years' wear, whether the asbestos can

pass through the seal and so on. If you decide on

sealing make sure it is one approved by the Fac-

tory inspectorate for sealing asbestos. One

study22 showed that latex spray painting of an

asbestos ceiling cut down the number of asbestos

fibres in the air by over half, but it did not eliminate the hazard — only stripping did that

On top of these unknowns you will have the

constant problem of checking whether the seal is

damaged; in a school an almost impossible task:

checking every time any maintenance is done,

new installations carried out, and so on. Finally, the hazard will reappear on removal. Will anyone remember that asbestos is present in ten or fifty

years' time? Will future demolition workers en-

danger themselves and the public unwittingly? Asbestos in a had stale. (HSE)

2(1 Selected written evidence to the Governments Advisory

Committee Ofl AsbcstOS 1976-77', IIMSO. 1977. p.111.

21 Health ha,ards ol sprayed asbestos coatings in buildings,

Technical Data Noc 52, HMSO, May 1976.

22 'Aheios exposure in a \'alc building, E,ir,ronmefllal

Research. vol 13. 1977. p146.

I

Sealing asbestos with an approved sealer. Note the use of protective equipment. (Dee Ceel, Sun)

An iron girder sprayed with asbestos and- sealed with an approved sealing spray. (Liquid Plastics)

161

162

Stripping asbestos — the safer answer. (HSE)

Sealing versus stripping: COStS

Clearly the case for careful stripping is strong. The only reason it is not recommended is cost. Some recent figures23 given for the cost illustrate this aspect: To seal, paint and label blue asbestos-covered Rolled Steel Joists (RSJs): £16.79 per m2 (C1.56 per ft2) To strip and seal residual fibres to RSJ surfaces with a Silicate adhesive: £26.00 per m2 (C2.50 per ft2) plus an additional cost for replacing the asbestos insulation with a non-asbestos substitute. British Leyland, where this work was done, chose sealing. The only guidance we have for procedures for stripping comes from the asbestos industry itself. They have produced a Code of Practice (Asbestos Research Council Guide No.3) which is 'approved' (although not formally under the 1974 Health and Safety at Work Act) by the Factory Inspectorate. Recently, an improved procedure has been described22 and brief details given below. Clearly workers stripping have got to negotiate the best procedures and those around the stripping have got to check on those procedures; using the comments and photos in this booklet as a start.


Case one: An improved stripping procedure

In 1963 the Yale University School of Art and Architec- ture was completed. This building has 35,000 square feet (3150 m2) of suspended gypsum board ceiling surfaces that had been

sprayed to between '/2 in. and 1 in. in thickness with a coating containing 15 per

cent of white asbestos

(Chrysotile). Under the normal influences of air currents ventilation leaks, vibration and servicing etc the ceiling soon began to deteriorate. Also some of the ceilings were only 6 ft 8 in. (203 cm) high and

easily reached. In 1967 a

maga/ine article interviewed a student '.. .as he pulls off a handful of ceiling'. By the

early 1970s the health hazards of asbestos were finally becoming known. A survey done by the Univer- sity and Connecticut State Department found a maximum level of asbestos in the air of 0.5 tibres per ml of air; one-tenth of the then US standard of 5 fibres per ml. Early in 1972 the ceilings were sprayed with latex paint to reduce asbestos

163

Two examples of better stripping procedures

The ceilings still looked to be in a bad state. Desks, library books and scientific equipment got sprinkled with ceiling material. Equipment got jammed with 'white grit'. Therefore, another investigation took place in 1974-75. It was

found that the original 1971- 72 sampling, which found 'safe' levels of asbestos in

the air, had been done in unnaturally quiet conditions: hardly typical of a

building used by 2,000 persons a year.

Sampling conditions

Air in the city of New Haven

Quiet conditions (as for sampling in 1971-72)

Ceiling contacted by stacked books

Fitters removing ceiling sections

Students and staff normally working

Cleaning staff working: 1 dry sweeping 2 dry dusting

done. Very dangerous levels Yale University Art and

are reached, especially by Architecture Building. (Yale Lnn'ersltv)

maintenance staff. Only a

level of 0.00 fibres per rn/is acceptable. As the author of the report, Robert N. Sawyer, states

methods of sealing or en-

closing the ceilings were less

satisfactory because of the ineffectiveness of fibre control, hazards of application, flammability, ceiling contact and maintenance', therefore stripping under carefully con trailed conditions was used. The cost of this work was around £25,000 (nearly £1/ft2 or £8-9/m2), and this did not include the replacement of ducting and lighting.

2 Work was done during the college holidays. Con-

0 02 tam mated areas were sealed - off with double parallel

layers of polythene sheets 15.5 taped to each door jamb. It

was found that two rooms

17.1 were needed for the safe

insulation of non-asbestos

0 ' areas from the stripping area.

fibre loss to the air. This cut down the fibre count by over half (67 per cent) to 0.2 fibres per ml. But It did not eliminate the hazard.

below: Repair of this light will cause dangerous asbestos exposure. (Yale University)

Several new sets of sampling gave the results in the table:

Procedure

Fibres 1 All construction workers

per ml (40 in this case) attended talks on the correct procedures, equipment, regula-

0.00 tions and health hazards;

1 6 3 Dry stripping created

40 much dust (see table). Soaking with ordinary

in water reduced the dust, but spraying with water plus surfactant (a soap solution) was much better.

Clearly the sampling done 1971-72 was totally mis-

leading, yet it is the most common way sampling is

164

It enab led a faster and more complete wetting of the area to be stripped. Fibres produced during stripping (fibres per ml)

asbestos

stripping

dry wet immediate work area

next room (sealed off) next but one room (also sealed off) 2.0 0.0

dry 82

wet (plain water) wet (water plus su rfactant) The wetting agent — which acts like soap was 50 per cent polyoxyethylene ester

I plus 50 per cent polyoxyethylene ether in a concentration of one ounce (30 ml) per 5 gallons (19 litres) of water, It was estimated that this method cut down the time of stripping by half.

4 To get down to zero dust counts (using the light microscope) it was necessary to have two extra cleaning of the stripped rooms, with at least 24 hours between each cleaning to allow the dust to settle.

165

75 8

6.4 2.0

Stripping method

Carpenters erecting partitions to seal off stripping areas. Wearing protective clothing and dust samplers. (Yale University)

below: Typical polythene barrier across doorway to reduce, but not eliminate, asbestos dust movement. (Yale University)

Dust count (fibres per ml)

23

8 (in practice reduced to 4.2)

6 All waste was disintegrated in a machine to reduce its volume for easy disposal. It was packed in 6mm plastic bags, sealed in strong cardboard drums and dumped according to US regulations.

6 All the materials (books, equipment and so on) that were in the area before

stripping were decontaminated in a special area. Dusting was done with high filtration vacuum cleaners, but the workers still wore protective clothing. The use of vacuum cleaners reduced the asbestos

dust in the air from 4.0 fibres per ml (dry dusting) to 0.4; hence the need for respirators.

7 A special cleaning area

was provided, equipped with a changing room, shower room, equipment area and laundry space. The

clothing of the 40 men was twice cycled through each

day. The two laundry men and respirator men wore protective clothing also.

8 Dust monitoring of the cleaned building continued well after the job had

finished. The results of 24 samples showed levels of 0.0 fibres per ml ronsistently.

The above improved technique shows considerable advance over the current asbestos industry 'safe' technique. It also shows

what could be done with a

bit of thought and some testing. Much more is possible if those exposed push for it.

166

Cleaning contaminated books with approved vacuum equipment and protective clothing. (W.If. Wittstein)

r r ,'

Machine for crushing asbestos waste. Compacted waste drops into drums and is sealed. (Yale University)

One of the drums, lined with a plastic bag, used for waste asbestos disposal. (Yale University)

T

167

t..—. .-4. - *

—/t

Sealed drums of asbestos waste ready for removal. Compare this with the common skip method. (Yale University) (Socialist Worker)

168

Case two: The basic stripping procedure

Sealing off area where asbestos is to be stripped with strong plastic sheeting. (ACS)

Only in areas 101 clean can workers NOT wear protectine equipment. It is not certain that enen this procedure will prenent escape of all asbestos to surrounding areas, there- tore it is adnisable to clear the immediate area.

asbestos containers Strong cardboard bins nacciirned down with w.sn polbtnene liners approved Sacs cci sealed after cse

cleaner

air enhauss from approved asbestos filtration anit

cleac area

t dirty area

seo,ed tunnel to cci soc a Oecontairination

Safer asbestos stripping procedure

sealed skip

atrflow

to approned asbestos

dursiping site with safe procedure

169

Stripping asbestos (A CS)

Decontaminating of asbestos dust on

clothing using approved vacuum equipment —

note that workers are still wearing protective masks.

(A CS)

170

(skips. (Envirocor)

171

Asbestos waste for disposal in sealed units

172

Chapter 8 Personal protection

It cannot be emphasised too much that all forms of personal protection should be considered as the last resort only or for short-term emergencies or maintenance. Not only is this method ineffici- ent and uncomfortable, but equipment like ear defenders and masks isolates you from your workmates. It is something that suits management more than it does you. Nor is that all. The wearing of such gear apparently places the responsibility for the health hazard on you. If you go deaf, suffer from lung damage etc, then it's your fault for not wearing the ear muffs and muzzles. Who makes the noise and dust in the first place? Not you, the worker. Who has the choice of a quieter machine and less dusty process? Not you, the worker. Who makes the big profits? Not you, the worker. Management made the hazards: make them clear them up.

Muzzles (respirators) The First World War saw the rise of the gas mask, which has been introduced into industry as the personal respirator. Before that time, in the absence of any real form of efficient muzzle, the Factory Inspectorate had always insisted on efficient ventilation (little though they knew about it). The principle was the right one: remove the dust or fume at source, before it gets to the worker. But the rise of gas masks soon gave employers a cheaper way of getting round regulations. By 1931 the Asbestos Regula- tions allowed the use of respirators instead of efficient ventilation. Nowadays the manufacture

An approved' mask for use with asheslos. Not a

safe mask though. (OGA W

This face mask was issued to a car mechanic during 1977 when he asked for Some protection against asbestos dust from brake shoes. It is useless for protection As for the claim that, 'workers enjoy wearing them' — no comment!

below. Mike Glyn and colleague of Sabre Safety. (Sabre safety)

MARTJNDALE PROTECTIVE MASKS Permit Free Breathing

Clear Vision Easy Speech

PROTECT- your health agarnst dust and preuenc dirt and irritants from reaching the nose, throat and lungs.

WAR N INC Genuine MARTINDALE ReGis are safe and only they should be used with this mask. Substitutes can be ineffect,ce and dangerous

Poiei,., and Soi, Maeafacia,e,s

MARTINDAIE PROTECTION LTD., Nd.n L .L d NWO 15W. Engknd. THE MOST POPULAR LIGHTWEIGHT MASK FOR OVER 40 YEARS

(

EeaEscr

ELS4I I- of these respirators is a lucrative industry, as a flip through any health and safety magazine (Hazards Bulletin apart!) will show. But even these developments are not allowed to go too far. As Mike Glynn, managing director of Sabre Safety, a company that recently produced a new British Standard in breathing apparatus, commented

Customers wanted something just a little better than what they had, but not drama- tically better (Sunday Times 21 Mar76)

173

Even the dust mask makers can't make anything too good (this is too costly) unless the wearers

and trade unions push for it.

Good basic guidance on the selection and maintenance of dust respirators for asbestos and its replacements are given in the Asbestos Research Council's Guide no.1 (revised January 1977) and the government's Technical Data Note 24 (2nd revision). In these publications there is given a list of 'Factory Inspectorate- approved' respirators. Only Facto ry-Inspectora te-

approved respirators should ever be used for protection against asbestos and its substitutes.

An 'approved' respirator All this really means is that some basic testing has been done on the mask to indicate that it works reasonably well; according to British Standard 4275 :1974. For instance, leakage tests are done on the mask to determine how much it leaks, but excluded from the tests are those with 'unusual facial contours' (whoever

they might be!), those with beards, long side- burns and heavy stubble. After this selection

they are, presumably, left with a few perfect faces. As a result of these crude tests the Fac-

tory Inspectorate say the following:

Concentration of asbestos dust (fibre per ml)

Blue Other types Type of respirator to be used

up to 4 up to 40 1/2 mask respirator

4 to 20 40 to 200 positive powered respirator

20 to 80 200 to 800 high efficiency dust or positive powered respirator

above 80 above 800 self-contained breathing apparatus (oxygen, fresh or compessed air)

Clearly the so-called safety of the mask depends on the concentration of dust expected (or

better, determined by sampling) and the so-

called 'protection factor' of the mask in question. All the 'protective factor' means is the amount by which the mask will reduce the dust. For the four types of mask given above, the

protect1on factors' are 20, 100, 400 and above

174

400. Therefore, for a half mask, the dust level inside the mask is reduced by one-twentieth of what it is outside the mask, and so on. There- fore, in a white asbestos dust level of 40 fibres per ml the mask will reduce the level you breathe (that is the level inside your mask) to 2 fibres per ml, the government's current 'safe' level.

Many authorities consider there is no safe level for asbestos exposure: therefore you want maximum protection. That is, the above table should be reversed: 1 Safest: independent air line or Oxygen supply; 2 Moderate: high efficiency dust respirator; 3 Fair: positive power respirator; 4 Poor: half mask respirator.

Simple gauze masks are almost useless; worse than useless because they give you a false sense of security. They were designed for so-called nuisance dusts such as cement and glass fibre, dusts that were thought at one time to do you no harm. It is very doubtful if any harmless dusts exist: all dust will harm your lungs or bronchial tubes, Of course, these masks are the Testing the leakage of a cheapest and that alone accounts for their popu- face mask. (HsE) larity among employers. Workers having to wear

I 175

BREATHING APPARATUS

PURETHA GAS MASKS

SPIRELMO SMOKE HELMETS

176

muzzles should demand a full choice of respirators from all those on the market. A recent

study of the ten best 'approved' asbestos masks in the US selected only four on the basis of good face fit, visibility and ease of breathing. In 1971

disposable face masks were developed for use with asbestos in the US; half of a dockyard workforce working with asbestos favoured this type of mask. Such masks have not yet been approved

by the UK Factory Inspectorate. There is

clearly need for a lot more research and development on new forms of face masks that are both comfortable and effective. One such development has been the Racal Amplivox Airstream Helmet. According to the manufacturers this mask is suitable for glass fibre dust; the helmet conforms to BS 2091 for Type A filtering effi-

ciency and will filter all particles above 0.5

micrometres in size to an efficiency of 90 per cent. However, it is not approved for asbestos,

It is important that special protective clothing is available for the use of workers with asbestos

(and other fibrous dusts). Again a full choice should be available. The best should be selected

by the workforce on the basis of minimum ad-

herence and penetration of asbestos and comfort. A full list of suppliers is given in Asbestos Research Council Publication No.1.'

i Protective equipment in the asbestos industry-respiratory

equipment and protective clothing', Ashestosis Research Council.

S ho. .d Frh:A

fl,h.ng

O.yg'. Ri,Oo Appo

The 'Airstream 'air puri- fying helmet. A new concept in respirators. Not suitable for use with asbestos — although it has been approved for such use in the US. (Racal)

Protective clothing

177

Standard protective clothing. (1/SE)

Compressed air suits and fully enclosed protective clothing. (Bullard, USA)

Case one: Asbestos penetrates protective clothing

Contractors stripping blue asbestos at British Leyland, Longbridge, Birmingham, had to strip a girder where it was necessary to work below the girder due to confined space. The men wore synthetic fibre overalls with self-contained hood and air- fed mask. After a shift of about 1 hour, the workers left the contaminated area

through an air-lock, placed their overalls in a sealed bag in another sealed chamber, removed their respirators in another room and finally entered a shower room. They wore only bathing trunks below their overalls. Washing consisted of a hot shower, involving washing the entire body with soap. The men

who worked under the girder had their hair checked for asbestos. Sure enough, blue asbestos was found and it took five hair washings to remove it to 'negligible proportions'. Use of a

'ladies' plastic shower cap', worn over the hood of the overall prevented penetration and no fibres were detected in the men's hair.

Tests showed that blue asbestos in water did pass

through the material of the overalls and very heavy contamination by Crocido- lite (blue asbests) was observed. (Annals of Occu- pational Hygiene vol 20 1977 p.197)

178

Clearly there is a need for more research on the best

materials to prevent the

passage of asbestos through overalls. Does this mean that workers who wear their home clothing underneath overalls and who are in contact with wet asbestos are likely to be taking asbes-

tos home to endanger both themselves and their families and friends? It looks like it! It shows you cannot be too careful. In the US

Naval Dockyards they have

favoured disposable, plastic- impregnated overalls with zips. These overalls are

permeable to air and do not trap body moisture. They cost about 75p per pair at 1976 prices. When special

laundry, transport and safe

disposal are taken into account they are said to be

competitive with synthetic fibre overalls.

On no account should dirty overalls be blown-off with compressed air. There are

special booths available equipped with vacuum lines. Such contaminated overalls should be washed

by special firms equipped to handle asbestos clothing. Taking contaminated overalls home will endanger both yourself, your family and friends.

Case two: Old washing machine not good enough

In May 1976 (not 1876), 24 men working with asbestos at the Belvedere Power

Station had to go on strike, with support from five other power stations, for the proper cleaning of their overalls. The contractors, Darlington Insulation Co, were using a domestic second-hand washing machine to clean the men's overalls. As Jim Reynolds, GMWU branch safety rep, on health and safety, said, 'The men

could see blue asbestos in their overalls'. (Guardian 12 May 1976)

Chapter 9 Environmental asbestos

Asbestos is found everywhere to a small degree. In the land, water and to a greater extent the air. Apart from a very few countries, for example Finland, where there are large areas of exposed rocks containing asbestos and weathering leads to airborne asbestos, most of this environmental asbestos comes from the past hundred years' industrial usage of asbestos. Asbestos in the air is the most common form of contamination. Nearly all this comes from vehicle brake and clutches, people working with and on asbestos products and the demolition of buildings containing asbestos (especially in the US where they favour demolition of tower blocks by explosion).

Recently' high levels have been found near quarries in the US that were mining rock contaminated with asbestos. This has led to public pressure through the courts and by withdrawing children from school; and one county, Montgomery, is now committed to a programme of dust supression that will involve extensive resurfacing of the roads, playgrounds and re- creation areas at a cost of up to £5 million. The US government is considering regulations to control the amount of minerals contaminated with asbestos and is requiring all quarry operators, in suspect geological areas, to report the asbestos content of their rocks. Nothing seems to be being done along these lines in the UK.

1 Asbestos: trouble in the air from Maryland rock quarry', Science, vol 197, 1977, p.237.

179

i so

Medical evidence points to what could be a very serious health hazard from environmental asbestos, but this is a difficult question to answer, and not too many people are trying to answer it. For instance, a study in 19772 on the incidence of the deadly asbestos cancer — Meso- thelioma — found a tenfold increase in the disease in the US State of Connecticut during the years 1935 to 1972. The authors conclude:

The rapid rise in Connecticut's Meso- thelioma (asbestos cancer) incidence rate closely follows the increase in the State's cumulative asbestos consumption.

As long ago as 1960 it was speculated that the use of asbestos tailings for road surfaces in South Africa may have been responsible for the large amount of Mesothelioma observed among non-asbestosworkers at the mines there. Since then plenty of medical reports3 have observed these cancers around factories and among the relations of asbestos workers. We have already pointed out the possible connection between the 33,000 deaths from lung cancer each year and non- occupational exposure to asbestos (see p.26). Clearly with many experts admitting there is no safe level to asbestos there is a great need to prevent unnecessary exposure to asbestos any- where. As the US Environmental Protection Agency have stated1

Safe levels of Carcinogenic substances (cancer-forming, as all forms of asbestos are) have not been established. Therefore, the proper public policy should be to act to minimise to the greatest extent possible emissions of such substances.

Asbestos in the air One of the most general exposures to asbestos is that which occurs in the air we breathe. The sources of this are: Asbestos from household goods and insulation! fire protection,

2 Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, vol 127,

1977, p.121. 3 Asbestos pollution', Science. vol i97, 1977, p.716.

Asbestos rubbed off from brakes, clutches and mufflers, Asbestos from asbestos factories (often from the extraction designed to offer some protection to the workers inside), Asbestos from the illegal and legal dumping of asbestos waste, Asbestos from the demolition of buildings and possibly from the erosion of asbestos-clad buildings. There are other sources of asbestos in the air, for example, asbestos from the aregates used in road works, but these are the most common sources known at the present time. Before we discuss some of the areas where asbestos has been found in the general environment, let us first look at the levels of asbestos that are being found in the general atmosphere.

How much asbestos is there in the air? A good question and one we are only just begin- fling to answer. Even now the only reliable information we have comes from the USA, since in this country the only figures we have come from the asbestos industry itself — which is like asking a prisoner to supply the information to convict her or himself. Almost ten years ago, in 1968, the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS) Standing Medical Advisory Committee reported on the cancer hazards of asbestos to the general public and recommended: Local authorities should be encouraged to make measurements of the concentration of asbestos particles of respirable size in the air

a building sites where asbestos sprays are being used; b asbestos dumps, and c factories from which particles may be dispersed in smoke and fumes.

This report, and a subsequent update in 1971, was covered up and remained confidential until, under pressure, it was made 'publicly available' (that is, it went into the House of Commons library), in April 1976. So much for 'open government' in a social democratic society.

181

Was this report kept confidential in the national interest? Or the interest of the asbestos industry? Is it in fact one and the same? What was done as a result of this report? Nothing. Perhaps that is

why it was confidential.

As mentioned above, the only environmental measurements we have in the UK come from the asbestos industry. Even when they are done under a local council authority guidance the crucial counting has been done by the asbestos industry.4 Some of these asbestos companies, such as Richard Klinger (Sidcup), who claim to ie 'one of the largest users of asbestos in the UK', are honest and admit,

If emissions of asbestos into the environment do occur we have no means of recording them with the type of equipment we use at present and, therefore, we assume they are zero.5

Asbestos industry samp- Pity the poor inhabitants of Sidcup, Kent. ling equipment for measuring asbestos dust in rural 4 For example see the evidence of the BBA groups to the

air. (Asbestos Information Advisory Committee on Asbestos 1976-77.

Committee) 5 See previous reference.

182

The other asbestos industry giants are more subtle than this: they have developed a method of measuring asbestos which shows that asbestos levels in the air 'do not differ from those found... at many sites ranging from Gravelly Hill to the Yorkshire Moors.'6 However, measurements from at least three different laboratories in the USA have shown that higher levels of asbestos in the air occur near demolition sites, asbestos factories, asbestos dumps and motorways. Once again the UK asbestos industry has shown itself to be untrustworthy as far as the health hazards of its products go. Of course, it has not been untrustworthy to its shareholders by producing such results, which have served to stave off the reality for a few more years while there is re-investment out of asbestos. When we talk of trust and responsibility we must be clear to whom we are trust- worthy and responsible.

6 See reference 4 above and a Nature, vol 234, 1971, p.93; b Analytical Chern ist, vol 45, 1973, p.809.

Case one: French Metro workers act over asbestos

Asbestos has been used in the French Metro in large quantities since the 1960s. It's all over the Metro. At least four workers are known to have suffered from asbestosjs. The unions concerned (CGT and CFDT) have had to stop work to draw attention to the ha,'ard. They have dernan- ded from the Metro management:

effective personal protection for workers medical examinations for all exposed workers

release of funds for the complete removal of asbestos on the Metro.

('Cancer on the Metro', Nouvel Observateur 25 Feb 1978; 'Asbestos on the Metro', L 'Humanite 25 Feb 1978)

183

On the right hand side of the photograph is shown the dangerous state of the asbestos at Garibaldi Metro underground station.

Case two: Killer dust on the London tube

Since 1970 John McMorrow, secretary of the London No.5 branch of the National Union of Railwaymen (NUR), has been trying to get the management, factory and railway inspec- torates and his own union to do something about the killer asbestos dust in the air Londoners breathe on the underground tube. As the diary below shows they have all dragged their feet.

Management, factory inspectorate and unions ignore hazards

A DIARY OF NEGLECT.

1969-70: John McMorrow himself had bouts of sore

throats and chest troubles. A consultant at a hospital said that he had to have

his tonsils removed because they had been

poisoned by asbestos dust.

1971: hears personally of many underground workers with chest trouble and who are called aback after routine X-rays and told they have lung scarring. Knows of at least a couple of cases of death from lung disease among such workers.

March 1973: enquiries by the branch reveal the exist—

ence of a confidential' report done by the London School of Hygiene and

Tropical Medicine during 1967 and 1969 of the dust levels at Highgate and

184

Warwick Avenue Tube Stations. A letter from London Transport to the branch reveals that 'the situation at Highgate in

particular has caused us

concern for a long time.' Methods, mainly speed reduction, were taken to reduce the dust, but they admitted: 'we would not wish to seem to claim that it (the dust nuisance)

had been eliminated.'

December 1973: many letters sent by John McMorrow to Factory Inspectorate. The only part of the underground covered by government regulations was the station

managers' office! A list of complaints (dust, dirt, poor ventilation, vermin and

effluent) from 25 tube stations, with regard to the

station managers' offices was sent to the Fl. No action was taken at most of these stations.

Februa,y 1974: earlier confidential reports released to NUR after branch pressure, press attention and the TUC's medical advisor (Dr A. Murray); show interest. Reports show improvement from high dust levels at Highgate, but absence of specific checks for asbestos in the words of Dr Murray, 'rendered the report superfluous'. A more accurate report was

promised.

1974: the results of the more accurate analysis specific for asbestos, done in January 1974 were made

available. They showed levels

of asbestos we/I above those

expected in the street at Highgate Tube. More importantly, the tests were done by the asbestos

industry itself by a method known to give conveniently low results. The real concentration of asbestos may be worse! This asbestos

industry report was rubber stamped by the TUG Centenary Institute of Occupation Health. Why? 1975: colleagues of John McMorrow's had to retire early because of chest trouble. The union took up the case and tried to get the Employment Medical Advisory Service (EMAS) to investigate. EMAS refused and deferred to the opinion of the London Transport doctor. 7 Sept 1976: sample of dust taken by Factory Inspec- torate at Baker Street station shows it to contain 11 per cent of deadly silica.

1 Dec 1976: Railway I nspectorate contacted requesting a visit to see the bad conditions at Camden Town tube. Acknowledged, but no action.

10 Jan 1977: John McMorrow requests the TUG Centenary Institute of Occupational Health to analyse samples of asbestos. Requests conformed by NUR General Secretary, Sidney Weighell, on 15 Feb. No results by March 1979!

llJan 1977: John McMorrow observes

contractors and LT staff at Bond Street cutting asbestos tiles with a power saw and thus creating much dust. Informed both Factory Inspectorate and Railway Inspectorate, the former visited and cleaned up site; no reply from the Railway I nspectorate.

29Apr11 1977: London Transport tests of asbestos dust caused by pulling in cables at Baker Street and Green Park show asbestos levels at the present government unsafe level.

5May 1977: Fleet Line workers strike over health hazards of asbestos coated cables to both themselves and the public. London Transport promises an

enquiry.

17 May 1977: Factory I nspectorate report on asbestos samples taken at Baker Street on 10 May released. Some men exposed to twice proposed US standard and more than 100 times the level recorded as background in the station.

16 June 1977: Factory Inspectorate comment on analysis report on deadly silica in tube dust, done in Sept 1976: 'the presence of crystalline silica indicates that the dust may be

potentially harmful.' But they suggest contacting the Railway Inspectorate.

25Aug 1977: Dr PA.B. Raffle, LT Chief Medical Officer, comments that the

asbestos industry report of 1974 will 'Enable us to dispose of any fears there may be about the asbestos content of the tube tunnel air.' He also claims that there is 'strict observance' of the 1969 Asbestos Regulations with supervision of staff or contractors staff 'where appropriate.' 27 Nov 1977: BSSRS and John McMorrow release a leaflet, 'Killer dust on the Tube', designed to tell both public and LT workers of health risk on the Tube.

March-April 1978: London Transport allow an 'independent' survey of asbestos dust on the tube by a new health and safety journal, International Environment and Safety. No problem says new survey. Yet the figures, although by an inaccurate method for environmental surveys, reveals the levels to be above the US recommended level!

28Apr11 1978: LT reveal an 'unknown' 400 yard

185

stretch of deadly blue asbes-

tos in the Northern Line tunnels between

Hampstead and Golders Green. It was put there in 1933 According tn LI there is (of course) no health haiard, but they are

going to remove it as a

matter of urgency and at a

cost of £350000 (Guardian 28 April 1978).

17 May 1978: I/ford and

Redbridge Pictorial reveal

health ha/ards from exposure in six tube trains from asbes-

186

tns put there in 1960. LI spoKesman OrPrTieflts, 'We annot say it was sat is

fa tory for men to have

worked on those trains.'

25 May 1978: ParliarrientarY replies to quest ions put to John Grant, Se retary of State for Employment, by Max Madden, MP, elicit reply, 'everything under control'. The only asbestos

adroit led to is he known stuff on the N or [bern Li no.

30 May 1978: BSSRS and

John M Morrow release rip

date leaflet on ha/aids to counter misleading information from LI. LI managers and doctors face

hostile meeting of London Transport union members.

Fears of trade unionists not allayed by devious answers

given by LT management.

7 June 1978: I/ford and

Redbridge Pictorial discovers SEO ret operation of asbestos

rem oval over three to four nights at Gants Hill tube station lube workers lairii rnierr in spare Suits'

Why are these men wearing masks at Baker Street tube station during 1977? What is the hazard? Deadl,v asbestos and silica dusts. Why is it not removed by vacuum equipment to protect both workers and passengers? (Michael Kahn)

right: The asbestos hut at Hampstead Tube in 1978 — removed after protest. (Greg Cohn)

used their accommodation to change and dragged asbestos sacks up the escalators.

6 July 1978: Capital Radio, London, does 30-minute programme on the health hazards on the tube entitled 'underground blues'. Many LT workers on the programme critical of LT actions or lack of them.

July 1978: Considerable correspondence — often heated — in Hampstead and Highgate Express about the safety of the stripping process going on on Northern Line. LT even provide 'safe' asbestos hut for staff — removed after protest. Surrounding area leafleted on hazards.

October 1978: TU safety reps, Tony Brewer and Bob Young, complain about tube carriages at LT's Acton Works that are 'clean' and are in fact still lousy with asbestos. After some

wheeler-dealing by management, Factory Inspectors and even the union carriages pronounced 'safe'. A leaflet prepared with the help of BSSRS and John McMorrow explains the facts and the carriages remain blacked.

20 November 1978: A confidential memo of June 1977 is released to the press which shows that deadly silica on the tube is three times the government's 'safe' level (Guardian 20 Nov 1978).

It is clear from the irresponsible actions of London Transport over many years that they are not concerned either about the health of their staff or the public. There have been small strikes over asbestos already: this is just the beginning.

187

Leonard Newman installing asbestos ceiling tiles at StJames'Park tube station in 1976. He said, 'This will shake with the trains going in and out. It will soon start to crack...' (Socialist Worker)

Measurement of asbestos in the air

Given the limitations it can be seen that it is not easy to get an accurate idea of the asbestos concentrations in the air of the UK, so we shall have to use information from America to give rough estimates of the amount of asbestos present. Recent measurements in Eire, using the US method, suggest there will be no great errors. We have mentioned before the present inadequate method of analysis which conveniently underestimates the amount of asbestos in the air. It is becoming more common to measure the amount of asbestos in environmental air using the accurate electron microscope method. The normal method used for industry is the optical microscope, which has a magnification (under phase-contrast conditions) of 400-5 OOX, whereas the electron microscope will magnify by 25,000X. The usual way of expressing the results of electron microscopy is in nanograms of asbestos per cubic metre of air. A nanogram is one thousand millionth of a gram. The following table gives an idea of the concentration of asbestos in non-work areas.

Cork City Cork County Athy, Co. Kildare (home of an asbestos factory)

For more details of the levels of asbestos in the air we breath see: 1 Journal of theAir Pollution Control Associ• ation vol 28 December 1978 p.1221. 2 ARC Monographs No.14 'Asbestos', World Health

Organisation 1977. 3 'Revised recommended asbestos standard', NIOSH, US Department of Health, Education and Welfare December 1976.

Typical asbestos levels in cities and country areas

Concentration (ng/m3) Survey Place

Dr Nicholson 45 out of the 49 cities less than 6

in the USA samples

1969-70 City of Daytona, Ohio, home of numerous asbestos

factories

24

US State of 5 country sites 1 - 4 Connecticut 17 urban sites (not near 1 -9

Dept. Health asbestos)

June 1977 Sites near asbestos factories Sites near motorways

30 1 0 - 25

Proposed — 30

Connecticut Standard, 1976

Dr RohI May 1977

188

0.6 0.0 - 0.2 83 - 88

Clearly then, in general, levels at country sites are below 1 nanogram and those in towns below 10 nanograms. But measurements done around building sites where sprayed asbestos was being done showed levels of 15 to 180 ng/m 3•7 There is no accurate way of converting measurements in fibres per ml to nanograms per cubic meter, but the following table gives an idea of the increased accuracy of the electron microscope method:

Sampling of asbestos near road surfaced with asbestos Containing rock in Rockville, USA

Sampling location Asbestos Concentration electron microscope optical microscope (f/mi) (ng/m3)

lOm from road 500 0.0 intersection; light traffic 2 moderate traffic 4,700 0.05 3 School parking; 1,ooo 0.0 lOOm from site of sample 2 4 Residential area; 2,000 0.01 70m from site of sample 2

Source: Science vol 196 1977 p.1319

It is possible from the above table to have a reading of zero fibres per ml using the standard method and yet to have a concentration of l,000ng/m3 — 100 times what you would expect to observe in the normal city atmosphere. Because of high costs, long analysis times and limited availability of equipment, the US government has not recommended the electron microscope methods for routine industrial measurements. However, for environmental measurements it is absolutely necessary. For instance, at the recent hearings in Cork nobody from the asbestos industry spoke up against the fact that the measurements must be done with an electron microscope and by analysis from outside the asbestos industry.

7 Science, vol 196, 1977. p.1319.

189

The electron microscope. The only accurate way (using the correct technique) to measure all the asbestos dust in the air. (Turner and Ne wall

Ltd)

Clearly from previous arguments there is no such

thing. The aim must be to bring down the level

of asbestos in the air to the absolute minimum. There has been a suggestion of 3Ong/m3 from one health authority: the US Connecticut

Department of Health.8 But there is really no agreement and no solid information to back up such a level. The asbestos

industry9 has proposed that 0.04 fibres/mI be

accepted as an environmental level. This is

totally unacceptable, for the reasons outlined above. The only value of these measurements is

to make sure that you are not being exposed to unnecessarily high levels of asbestos — for

example, from demolition, asbestos waste and so on — and for public health authorities to ensure that the present asbestos in the air is reduced over the coming years.

s Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, vol 25,

1975, p.1207. 9 A nnals of Occupational Hygiene, vol 12, 1969, p.141

190

A safe level of asbestos in environmental areas?

Asbestos in water and soil There is much less known about the amounts of asbestos in water and soil and the methods for analysis are even less accurate. It is not yet clear whether asbestos in water and soil presents a health hazard. Whilst it is known that asbestos workers suffer from excesses of stomach cancer this may come from inhaled asbestos that is being swallowed (through protective mechanism of cough and sputum) and so on. Earlier work1° suggested it was too early to say whether asbestos in water caused cancer. More recent work1 1

suggests there is no health hazard even in mining areas where there are high concentrations of asbestos in the drinking water. But much more work is needed to be sure, and in the meantime it is better to be safe than sorry. Sampling has been reported since 1968 on the amount of asbestos in beverages and drinking water.12 Levels are generally given in millions of fibres per litre of liquid tested: these are some typical results:

Asbestos in beer, wine and water

Sample Source Millions of asbestos fibres per litre

Beer Canada 4 - 7 Beer USA 1-2 Vermouth France 2 Vermouth italy 12 Gingerale —

12 Tonic water — 2

Orange drink —

Tap water Town of Thetford (asbestos mines)

Tap water Town of asbestos Source: Public Health Risks of

10 Exposure to Asbestos EEC 1977

10 Journal of the American MedjcalAssocwtion vol 228, 1974, p.1019. 11 Archives of Environmental Health, July/August 1977 p.185 12 Nature, vol 232, 1971, p.332.

191

3 172

6

AsEsro t4S BEEN IZOONb IN 3EER.,

(asbestos mines) River water Ottawa

192

Apart from pollution due to waste tailings from

asbestos mines (and factories?) there is evidence

that water can pick up asbestos from asbestos-

cement pipes.13 Because of the possible health

hazard the use of asbestos filters for the filtering of beverages (beer, wine) has been banned in the

US. The discovery'4 that 15 out of 29 French wines

tested contained asbestos caused a bit of a scare.

Seven of the samples had 'very high' levels: that is 2 to 40 million fibres per litre. There is no need for these wines to be filtered — the cause is

the consumer demand for clear wine and the

manufacturer's 'need' to avoid the long delays of

natural settling — and there are many substitute

non-asbestos filters'5 but, whilst almost certainly safer, the nature of these replacement filters needs to be investigated more fully.

The attitude of the asbestos industry to water

pollution is shown in the fact that it took the

non-scientist chairwoman, Arlene Lehto, to dis-

cover that the US asbestos industry was dump-

ing 67,000 tons per day of asbestos containing waste into Lake Superior. This was stopped by a court order because of the possible health

hazards.'6 Nearer home the improved planning

permission for the Cork asbestos dump included

provisions for the sampling of both air and water.

1 3 American Water Works Association Journal, September 74.

14 NewScientist, 14 October 1976, p.78.

15 New Scientist, 13 October 1977.

16 EnvironmentalActjott, Scptcmber 1973, p.3

Asbestos in the house

Asbestos is to be found around the house in many forms. Some of the more common sources were described in an article by Dr W. Smither of Cape Industries, in Woman's Own in 1976. He gave the figures below in a letter to Nancy Tait, the asbestos campaigner, in November 1976.

Asbestos from iron rests, hair dryers, cookers and toasters Domestic applicance Iron rest

Portable hair dryer: new

Electric toaster:

Gas cooker seal:

after use

new after use

new 1 year old 4 years old

Number of asbestos fibres/mi 0.01

0.04 0.01

0.18 0.04

0.02 0.02 0.08

193

194

These levels, even though carried out by the asbestos industry, indicate a real health hazard, sometimes approaching the US government and TUC's recommended level for industry. Many even come close the asbestos industry's own inadequate standard of 0.04 fibres per ml. There is no need for the use of any asbestos around the home. Those with asbestos domestic goods should dispose of them at once in a safe manner, for example, Rawiplastic Do-it-yourself wall fillers, Screwfix and so on, have been known for several years to contain deadly asbestos.1 Studies'8 have shown that when working with such materials peak levels of over 40 fibres per ml (over three times the current so-called government 'safe' level) can be reached during dry mixing and sweeping the floor. They also found

high revels of quartz and talc, both known to cause lung disease.

It is undeniable that there is a real need for the

banning of asbestos in all consumer goods and

17 NewScientist, 14 August 1975, p.377. 18 Science, vol 189, 1975, p.551.

Patching up holes in a wall. If the filler con rains asbestog there is a real health hazard. (Hilary Evans)

rigorous health checks on the hazards of the other products they contain. The most sick use of asbestos in the home came to light recently.'9 Analysis by Warrington's Chief Environmental Health Officer, Bill Snow, showed that Crown Brand Puff Cigarettes contained asbestos. These toy cigarettes emit a cloud of dust when the cigarettes are blown. Fairly prompt action by the Department of Prices and Consumer Protection seems to have prevented the sale of these potential killers. What will they think of next? As with drugs, the contents of all consumer goods should be labelled clearly. Those that have known health effects should be banned. Health data should be produced for all ingredients and for the final product as it is to be used. Imprisonment should await those that break such laws. There has been a lot of action by community groups and organised workers over the environmental hazards of asbestos in schools, hospitals and council estates, and by residents living near asbestos-using factories and asbestos dumps. Keep it up!

19 New Scientist, 4 November 1976.

195

Baths workers win safer conditions for asbestos work

For many years the brown asbestos (amosite asbestos)

lagging around boilers in Kentish Town swimming baths North London has

been in a dangerous state. Both workers and public, including children, are

involved since the baths also has a public laundry attached. In 1971 boiler workers had been instructed to work on the boilers with complete disregard for the 1969 Asbestos Regulations. A Factory Inspectorate report of September 1977 confirmed this, 'The lagging on numerous plant items was badly damaged and the lagging appeared to be

likely to contain asbestos at least as a mixture. If you have not had all the lagging analysed then the damaged

lagging should be repaired and precautions appropriate to an asbestos risk taken whilst this is carried out.' Nothing was done by management for sixteen months. And nothing was done by the Factory Inspec- torate to enforce this recommendation.

In the early summer of 1978 the NUPE shop steward at the baths wrote to the management Safety Officer to complain of the ha,ard. Nothing was done. The steward took the matter to his branch secre-

tary and finally some air tests were done. The tests

196

were done during a quiet period when the asbestos

was not being disturbed. They used a method unsuit- able and inaccurate for the levels where children are

(environmental levels). The so-called safe level for asbestos is not safe — there is no safe level.

On 5 December 1978 a

meeting of nearly all the 30 NUPE members at the Baths decided to give management a month to agree to remove the asbestos after being addressed by an expert from the TU North London Health and Safety Group. Management responded by putting up notices warning workers not to touch the asbestos. But their very jobs meant they would have to touch asbestos. Further, the public, especially kids who ran around the boilers, were still exposed. On 8 December management conceded that the asbestos

would be temporarily repaired and stripped over the next year. But the baths would remain open during stripping. The workers brought in to do this temporary work were a

bunch of cowboys. The 1969 Asbestos Regulations were broken during this sealing and partial stripping. One worker was even told to sweep up asbestos dust! After complaints were made, useless nuisance dust masks were made available.

On 3 January 1979 the union stewards rimet higher

management and coni- plained about the risks, demanding:

1 Management give an assurance that all asbestos

will be removed from the building. 2 That the building be closed for this operation for the safety of staff and

public. 3 That a date be fixed for the work to be done.

Management refused and the NUPE members came out on strike and picketed the baths on Friday, JanLiary 5. Leaf-

lets were quickly prepared, sent to the press, local councillors of Camden

Council and MRs. By Wednesday 1 0th the strikers had won their demands and

the council agreed all the asbestos would be stripped, with the building closed, when the boilers had their annual 10-year inspection in early spring 1979. The strike illustrates several

points. The Use by management, in this case a progressive council, of experts to baffle workers. The important role of TU sympathetic experts. The quick use of information bulletins to in for rn press, cou neil lois and

MRs, other workers and the public. And most important of all the need for trade union solidarity and action.

(Source: Morning Star8 and 9 January 1979. Hampstead and Highgate Express 5 and

12 January 1979. Hazards Bulletin No 15 Spring 1979)

Asbestos lagging in public laundry Kentish Town Baths (North London H & S Group)

Signing the petition, on the picket line, demanding the safe removal of asbestos at Ken tith Town Baths, London, January 1979. (Morning Star)

197

198

Chapter 10 The hospitals scandal

Most people would think of a hospital as the safest place in the world as far as health is concerned — after all, isn't that what they exist for? Well, for the workers in hospitals (consult- ants apart, that is) this is far from true. On top of bad wages and lousy conditions they also have to put up with a lot of ill-health: back ache, infections and so on.1 On top of this there is the asbestos hazard. Most hospitals are alive with asbestos. Sometimes on the wards, but more commonly in the basements, kitchens and laundries, where the insulation on the many steam pipes is often damaged and flaking. This is spread around the hospital through ventilator shafts and on clothing and food.

HOrTLS - RIDDL-EJ wrrH SgES1Oc

1 See 'Warning ElM hospitals can damage your health

BSSRS leaflet. 1977.

Case one: Death of hospital fitter There is plenty of evidence that, until recently, hospitals cared little for their workers. The case of John Stalker is typical: John Stalker worked as a plumber and pipe fitter at various hospitals in the Harrogate and Rippon Hospital Management Committee's area during the 1950s and 1960s. He described conditions during 1965 at one hospital, Scotton Banks, Knares- borough:

We mixed the new, blue asbestos in the pipe duct and it was very dusty indeed. No masks were provided and there was no extraction equipment. Our overalls, which were just normal boiler suits, were not cleaned afterwards and we just continued wearing them until it was time for normal laundry. We were never told that it was a dangerous practice to move asbestos lagging in this way, and it was a filthy job.

He left the hospital group in 1969. By 1974 he had become ill with fatigue, coughing, back pain and night sweating. He had a

lung operation and by October 1975, it was diagnosed that he had the deadly asbestos cancer — Mesotheli- oma. It was thought that he might live 3 to 6 years. But

he died a very distressing death in 6 months — March 1976. His son, Keith Stalker, described his last months: 'My dad had been a fellow who never complained or expressed his feelings... But at the end he was like a skeleton, crying and asking for morphine and talking about suicide. It was terrible to watch.' (The Northern Echo 1 June 1976)

There is plenty of evidence from hospital workers to confirm that this is no isolated incident The following brief reports come from the press during the last couple of years — there are no doubt many more un- heard-of struggles.

Case two: Cardiff Royal Infirmary In May 1976 — 54-year-old Frank Beason was suspended by Cardiff Royal Infirmary management for refusing to work in hazardous conditions. Eight other maintenance fitters walked out in sympathy. For some months the fitters had been asking management to clear up the crumbling asbestos covering on some water heaters. As Frank Beason said: 'The management has been very apathetic.. .some of it [the asbestos] was lying inches thick on the ground... Similar lagging is on the ventilation pipes too, so we are working in the stuff all the time.' An industrial tribunal accepted the

inadequacies, recommended a better mask and urged a further review of the conditions at the hospital. After a few days on strike, and with the AUEW's intervention, the workers reluctantly returned to work. One month later five of the men, including Frank Beason, were dismissed, Management claimed: 'It was nothing to do with asbestos. It is just coincidence that the same men are involved.' As Frank Beason said:

There is no doubt at all we are being victimised. I don't really know the reason. It may have been all the fuss we made over asbestos. After that business I wasn't given any work to do. (Guardian 31 May 1976)

So all you get for asking for your basic rights — rights that would also protect the patients — is the sack.

Case three: Dying of Northampton General Hospital In late 1976 asbestos dust was found near the maternity wards in Northampton General Hospital. One of the passages with damaged blue asbestos was open to the general corridors. To work in the passage Post Office engineers wore special clothing and breathing equipment, At first the management

____________ 199

denied there was a hazard

but under pressure closed

a 'perfectly safe' corridor for inspection because they did not know 'whether the corridor contains asbestos'.

How could they say it was

'perfectly safe' then? Doctors have said they are

ashamed of conditions at the hospital, which has been

starved of funds and is now

being even more run down because of the cuts Yet David Ennals, the Secretary for Social Services, visited the hospital in January 1977 and commented, 'a fine hospital.. .the standards of patient care are first-class'.

Apparently, inspecting another dingy corridor (not the one with asbestos>,

through which patients pass, he was reported as remarking that brushing with a heavy broom would fix it. (Daily Mirror 22 January 1977. Guardian 22 January 1977)

above: Asbestos for sale outside the Middlesex hospital. (Alan J.P. Dalton)

Lagging in a bad state of repair at the Middlesex Hospital, London. (Alan J.P. Dalton)

right: Some sealing done whilst stripping asbestos at the Middlesex Hospital during 1977. Experiments have shown that one polythene barrier is not enough to stop the spread of deadly asbestos dust. (IFL)

200

Case four: Asbestos in the air at London's Middlesex Hospital For many years shop-floor trade union workers at the Middlesex Hospital — a

major London teaching hospital — have been trying to get management to do something about the damaged asbestos in the corridors through which they pass, the rooms in which they work and the kitchens. Management have dragged their feet. By 1977 they were beginning to do a

little, although still disputing the danger of the hazard. For instance, the shop stewards got a sample of the lagging analysed and found it to contain 'large numbers' of blue asbestos fibres, whereas management's analysis found only a 'trace' of blue asbestos. (Guardian 25 March 1977)

By August 1977 the district engineer, Mr PT. Vaughan, had informed the Joint Shop Stewards Committee that,

the opportunity is being taken to strip out the asbestos lagging to all the plant rooms involved and

replace it with an acceptable safe material. ..The factory inspector has visited the site and laid down certain requirements for the safe removal of the lagging to comply with current legislation.

Management brought in a doctor who used the asbestos

industry front — the Asbes- tos Information Committee— to reassure the workers, with quotes like, 'You may get knocked down by a bus' and 'after all, you swallow dust off brake linings from outside'. The old 'two wrongs make a right' mentality. To counter this, the unions brought in their own experts from outside and had a general meeting, to which the management doctors and experts were invited. But the struggle to remove all the asbestos (only recently management put asbestos ceiling tiles in the new kitchen) and check that it is being done safely still goes on. As Tom McFadden, an AUEW member at the hospital, put it in September 1977:

The basement at this hospital has pipes running all around with disturbed asbestos... We tried to bring in the factory inspector several times — he does come I have been told. He does not see the shop stewards, nor does he make any effort to contact us. So much for health and safety at this hospital.

Case five: Manor House Hospital, London

Some time in 1974, TGWU members at Manor House

Hospital (a private hospital for trade unionists!) suggested to management that a safety committee be formed and the lagging in the hospital be checked for leakages of asbestos. In May 1975 the union approached the management again. On 27 May the Factory I nspector was called in. In part the I nspector's report read:

The small areas of loose blue-coloured asbestos on an overhead pipe in the laundry should be sealed or otherwise treated without delay...

Immediate evacuation of the laundry was not ordered as it was thought that the levels of airborne asbestos fibres in excess of the limits in the attached Technical Data Note number 52 were not exceeded.

How long had the workers in the laundry already been exposed to possibly blue asbestos? How long had already ill patients been exposed to asbestos in their bed sheets? After some delay the 'repairs' were done in the laundry. These consisted of wrapping some plastic sheets around the damaged lagging and were totally inadequate since the vibration from the washers and air movement from a

201

nearby fan could easily set the asbestos free. The union insisted that air sampling be carried out in the laundry. Harwell were called in and the analysis of asbestos in the air after repairs was 0.016 fibres per ml. The Factory lnspectorate, management and Harwel all argued that this level

was safe. They all used the so-called safe level of 2 fibres per ml. Now even the asbestos industry applies the level of 0.04 fibres per ml to the environmental situation ('Safety of Buildings Incorporating Asbestos', Asbestos Infor- mation Committee 1974) which is almost half the asbestos industry's safe'

level, is dangerous. Even more so when you consider the safer standards argued for by more independent authorities.

The union wanted the laundry closed and the asbestos removed. Some months previously management had closed the laundry for new machinery to be installed, and had then contracted Out the washing. The laundry workers were found other work while this was being done, so the demand was in no way unattainable. Management had copies of Factory Inspectorate Tech- nical Data Notes 38 and 52 and the Factory lnspectorate had indicated that repairs/ substitution should be done in accordance with the

202

E5SI

1969 Asbestos Regulations. In fact the contractors brought in to do the work in the laundry wore no

respirators, left windows open, allowed hospital staff into the room while working, and did not use vacuum equipment to clean up. This was reported by the union to the Factory I nspectorate. After being assured by management over the telephone that

everything was in order, the

Inspector ref used to take

any action.

To gain support for their case the union members

told the patients of the

possible health ha/ard. For this reason, Jose Caba, the TGWU branch secretary, was sacked. Mr George Rignall, hospital secretary, comurironted -

Mr Caba approached patients and created

anxiety in their ci rids concerning the alleged danger from asbestos.

This could be detrimental tr) the patiori ts'

health and their recovery.

To do this was quite improper. It can't be

tolerated in this hospital and is quite out

of order. (Hampstead

and Highgate Express 16 July 1976)

Although Jose Caba was re-

elected as branch secretary by a 2 to 1 majority just before the dispute, management managed to split the union and form a 'moderate' group. Despite a stoppage by Jose's supporters he was not reinstated. One of the more disgusting aspects of this affair was

seeing senior trade unionists on the management board of the hospital outdoing the hospital management in their condemnation of Jose's action. Jose Caba made a claim for wrongful dismissal: he was offered an out-of-court settlement of £250 for 'loss of earnings' and this was accepted.

The State of some of the lagging at Manor House Hospital, London in 1975. (Jose Ca ha)

Case six: Leicester General Hospital Bob Moloney, NUPE member, has described the fight against asbestos at Leicester General Hospital (Hospital Worker date unknown) The dangers of asbestos were first brought to the attention of a shop steward by a chemist at the hospital, who pointed out the dangers of asbestos in the hospital subways housing steam pipes and so on.

Management's first response was that they were scaremongering — You've worked with it for years, why worry flow? The union was not satisfied and called a meeting with management and the area engineer. To their surprise he said asbestos was deadly. Protective clothing was brought in, not in weeks, but the next day. So much for scaremongering.

But why had nothing been done before? For the past six months workers had been clearing the stuff by hand, with no protective clothing, and had even been going into wards with their overalls smothered in dust. Contrac- tors were called in to strip the asbestos: they quoted £30 a foot. The removal job cost the hospital £600.

Why bring in contractors? The hospital maintenance men said they would do it for double time on normal days, double and a half on

Saturdays and treble time on Sundays. These rates were compared with the contractors' and were cheaper, but, whilst accepted by local management, the DHSS turned it down flat and offered lOp an hour on top of the normal rate. A lousy ten pence an hour for working clad in protective clothing, breathing equipment and so on, crawling on your stomach through a duct sometimes less than 2 ft square, next to steam pipes and sometimes knee- deep in water.

Case seven:

City Hospital, Nottingham

During the construction of a new maternity unit in 1974 a study was made (Annals of Occupational Hygiene vol 18 1975 p.151) of the asbestos spray that was used to coat the steel structure. They found the men doing the job were protected but they left enough asbestos waste around that other unprotected workers could be exposed to clouds of asbestos above 20 fibres per ml when sweeping up. The method used to estimate the general environmental levels over the rest of the hospital was not accurate enough to detect any asbestos.

Hospitals: conclusion There is clearly a very serious problem with asbestos in most hospitals. From the above accounts it is clear that most managements are being obstructive to rank and file union action on behalf of both their members and the patients. Clearly the hospital unions (NUPE, COHSE, NALGO, AUEW, TGWU & EEPTU) will have to develop a clear policy on asbestos that includes rates for the direct labour force to do the job where they so desire.

203

Chapter 11 Asbestos in schools and housing estates

Blue dust closes school

Asbestos in schools

According to one report1 asbestos could be

present in about 8,700 of the 13,000 new schools built between 1945 and 1975. One Doncaster

heating engineer, Dennis Shaw, said: I have woken up in the night in a cold sweat thinking of the hundreds of schools where I have installed blue asbestos... When blue asbestos is installed it is mixed with water and then smeared on heating pipes. This dries out with the heat and leaves a fine blue asbestos dust on the

pipes. This gets into the heating ducts. I know schools where the dust is two to three inches deep in the ducts. A mouse running along stirs it up. Then the convec- tion currents take it into the classrooms. When we were working with it, or carrying out repairs, we came out of the ducts looking like snowmen. The dust seldom settles, with the children

stampeding down corridors. Several schools have been closed for asbestos stripping and some councils, such as Durham, have had their architects searching their council buildings to find out where the asbestos is and check it. There seems to be no systematic checking on the

presence and state of the asbestos in Britain's schools. There has been a ban on the use of asbestos in schools2 by the Department of Edu- cation and Science, but this still leaves a lot to

204

I Daily Mail, 30 April 1976.

2 Daily Mirror, 6 July 1976.

Jo—

OC

There may be some 7 million US children in 13,500 schools exposed to dangerous levels of asbestos dust according to one recent US report. Levels in one school were 100 times that outside. In another simply moving books about disturbed the asbestos insulation so much that levels were reached over six times our current 'safe' level. Safe and careful stripping during school holidays is the answer ('US experts go to school on new asbestos hazard', New Scientist, 11 January 1979, p.80)

be done. There are not even any instructions being given for the safe disposal of asbestos materials from schools that are being replaced by non-asbestos substitutes. The National Union of Teachers (NUT), in its evidence to the Advisory Committee on Asbes- tos, has asked for:

1 Sealing off all asbestos; 2 Air-sampling of asbestos levels in schools; 3 Checks on maintenance workers who may have to work with asbestos and that they should receive proper instructions; 4 Asbestos should be replaced wherever possible; 5 Financial provisions should be made for the treatment and removal of asbestos in schools.

There is plenty of evidence that repair work in schools, as in hospitals, is being skimped because of the cuts in public expenditure. There is no doubt that NUT members will have to ensure that these minimum demands are met, for both the safety of themselves and the children.

Case one: Asbestos in an East London school

A pupil at Trinity school, East London, had told his dad, a docker, that he was pulling handfuls of flaky stuff off the school ceiling supports. His dad had been active in the campaign to ban asbestos in the London docks (see p.148): he wasn't goinq to have his son poisoned by the stuff. He got it analysed through TU contacts. Sure enough it was asbestos.

He contacted the NUT branch and they took the

issue up. The council did not react very quickly and in September 1977 the NUT branch at the school passed the following resolution unanimously:

In view of the potential health and safety to the staff and children, posed by the ineffectual sealed asbestos in the New Block, we, the members of the National Union of Teachers at Trinity will refuse to teach in the affected areas unless work to remove — or

completely and safely seal — the asbestos is completed by Monday 10 October, and the adequacy of these measures is certified by two independent experts, one private and one public. We do not consider painting provides an adequate seal.

After this something was done.

205

Case two Women cleaners fight asbestos dust

The Holbrook annex of North East London Poly- technic is sited in Plaistow, East London. The annex has

four departments including a child study department that children attend. In the

summer of 1976 the annex was being fire-proofed to meet new fire regulations. The five resident cleaners — Ann Nicholson, Mary Pelling, Flo Batt, Queenie

Webb and Lorraine Webb —

spent the summer cleaning-

up after the workmen. They were told that the sheets

were only harmless

plasterboard (but see

p.108). As Ann said, 'We

used to pick up the offcuts and put them in with the other rubbish. The bottom floor, which is

blue polished inn, was

pure white with like a lot of snow with footmarks across it. 'On September 24 the students came back and one of them pointed out that the asbestolux sheets contained asbestos.

During that week there was some to and frowing between

the Polytechnic management, the cleaners union official, Bill McCall of the GMWU, the Factory Inspectorate and the cleaners and students

doing a bit of picketing and

then calling it off when the

'poly management said it was safe. But on 30 Septeri her the pike1 by 1h' worruui (:leaners was made offk al

206

by the CMWU but not the strike. This means that they did not get any strike money. The strikers demands were

quite simple:

1 To have me asbestos

in the air measured.

2 To have the building decontaminated by specialist unionised labour. 3 To have a register

kept of all those who had corrie into contact with the building. 4 No victimisation.

The five cleaners stayed on

strike for tour non ths with an additional month un-

paid leave. After much wheeler dealing by both Polyte hriic rtanaqerreflt

and the union (including the attempted sacking of one cleaner — Lorraine Webb) the cleaners finally won most of their demands.

The Poly never accepted there was a health hazard

even though they finally paid £1000 to a specialist firm to clean it up1 With weekly wages of £30 each

it would have cost £150 to

employ the five cleaners for an equivalent time.

During the courageous strike some lessons were learnt

a In any dispute it is

vitally irriportant to keep

other workers inforrred with regular rmeetings and

hroddsheets. The rmianage-

WOMENNoTAT,, tAIF% fl IF wry %

ment put out 'expert' advice to say it was safe and other branches of the same and different unions within the Poly were confused and did not act.

b Workers must ensure they have access to identification facilities etc. before a dispute situation arises. Once it occurs you do not have a lot of time to act. c Many union officials, because they are divorced from the working conditions of their members, do not feel the importance of health and safety issues. Attempts have to be made in such cases to contact the members of the unions concerned.

Ann Nicholson summed it up, 'You are fighting everyone, you are fighting the employer — not that you know who they are — you are fighting the union, you are fighting the factory inspectorate You are protecting everyone — the staff, the kids, the people in the street. If you had everyone behind you, all the council workers, all the building workers who are fighting asbestos in Newharn, you could win. You would be making it safer for everyone. But what can five of you do on your own2' (Hazards Bullet/p Nos 5 and 7. Guardian December 13 1976 and Spare Rib January 1977)

207

above: Fipe women cleaners on the picket line at the North East London Polytechnic Holbrook Annex, demanding the safe removal of asbestos during 1976. (Morning Star)

No danger say Poly- technic management. But this was the equipment that special con tractors used to clear-up the asbestos waste previously swept-up by unprotected cleaners. (Socialist Worker)

208

Asbestos in housing estates

Terry Bellamy (right) with contaminated foot- hail shirts. (Socialist Worker)

Case one: Asbestos in East London garages

In 1972 Terry Bellamy, a London docker, complained to Newham Council about the loose blue asbestos in the garages of 14 council houses in Biggerstaff Road, London. The garages are

integral to the house, the ceiling of the garage being the floor of the upstairs room. Terry runs a youth club in the area and stores the sports-gear in his

garage, 'Sets of football gear, cricket gear, shorts — everything you can think of.' Other mothers and fathers of Biggerstaff Road commented: 'That's where the kids play when it rains... The baby's pram is in there.'

A two-inch layer of blue asbestos foam was blown on to cover the straw ceilings of the garages. Over the years it has deteriorated. As Terry says: 'The least touch and it flakes. I have hit my ladder or fishing rods on it and it flakes down like snow. First thing you see when you open the garage is

dust.' After many years of letter-writing, Terry got a

sample of the dust analysed early in 1976: it was confirmed to be blue asbestos.

He wrote straight to the council. At last they re-

acted, sealing off the garages and marked them: Danger Keep Out. It took the council three months to

months to strip the asbestos. The council then said they were safe. Terry checked and found 12 of 14 garages were still contaminated with asbestos. The council closed the garages down again and fitted them with new ceilings. Terry got a sample of this new 'safe' ceiling analysed by a scientist, Dr Martin Brewer, and it was found to contain white asbestos. When the council reacted to the asbestos problem they burned the contents of the garages. No warning or

whose possessions were burnt. The dust had also spread up through the floor- boards and contaminated the furniture above. The tenants estimate that about £140,000 will be needed in compensation. The council has already offered to pay for the football gear they destroyed, but the tenants are having to go to the high court for fuller compensation. As one of them said: 'It's only the tip of a very big asbestos-

berg.'

Terry Bellamy outside the contaminated garages (Socialist Worker)

do any more and another two reason was given to those

209

Case two: Asbestos in council flats

In April 1976 it was found that more than 200 people on the Samuel Pepys modern council estate in

Deptford, South London, had been exposed to deadly blue asbestos. As 44-year-old Ron Smith said:

I have lived in the block nearly ten years and the corridor ceilings have

been damaged all that time. Vandals gouge the soft panels out and tear them to pieces. The fluffy dust is always coming down.

210

A scar on the left lung of his 14-year-old daLighter, Janet, has shown up on a routine school X-ray. Ron Smith said: 'The specialist wasn't sure what it was. But he didn't know then about the asbestos in our flats...'

The Samuel Pepy's tenants' association had been asking the council to repair the ceilings for about 18 months. Seventy workers were finally sent to seal off the ceilings in Pelican house — the worst affected block. The work was done over the Easter weekend of 1976, apparently using safety precautions: sealing off the area

with wood-framed polythene

sheets, using disposable overalls, approved respirators and special changing rooms.

'It's only white asbestosc said a GLC spokesperson in April 1976 when talking about the hazards to 400 tenants living in adjoining blocks. Therefore there is

'no danger'. In Marlow and Millard houses on the estate the corridors have ceilings with a disintegrating, soft coating, 1 -1 Y inches thick of half and half riiineral

fibre plus white asbestos, sprayed on concrete. The GLC proposed to seal the flaking asbestos by fixing a

Janet, aged 14, and Ron Smith. (Syndication International Ltd)

perforated metal lathing below the asbestos and applying a plaster-based material to it. Work was to start in August 1976. They were to shoot bolts through the asbestos causing some 'small disturbance'. The workers would wear masks and the entrance d'oors would be sealed with tape whilst the work was carried out In view of the above, the residents were unhappy about the information given to them by the housing manager, and refused to close their doors and vacate the corridors. The GLC obtained a High Court injunction restraining two residents from preventing the council undertaking the work and work started on 16 September.

The tenants' fears were confirmed:

1 The Factory lnspectorate had not been asked to advise;

2 Each day loose asbestos was left around on ledges and floors;

3 The bolts did not take, so channels were cut in the dry asbestos creating much dust;

4 All working and sweeping (not vacuuming) was done dry, creating unnecessary dust when an asbestos- approved vacuum should have been used;

5 Contractors' operatives used communal staircases while wearing protective clothing;

6 The plastic sealing curtains were not kept properly sealed while work was in progress.

Following complaints, the district housing manager got one of his staff to mop up the corridor, without any special precautions. Loose asbestos was still found on the ledges after mopping up and the mop was thrown in the general rubbish bin. After mopping, a thin film of asbestos dust was left all over the floor. After more complaints, the housing manager, in a letter to Nancy Tait, the asbestos campaigner and author of Asbestos Kills, accepted that, 'The measures taken to protect operatives and tenants are not being applied as diligently as they should be.' He promised closer supervision iii the future, but this only after all the above action and complaints.

211

212

Chapter 12 Living near an asbestos factory or dump

There are no regulations concerning the amount of asbestos a factory or dump site can emit into the air or water of the surrounding environment. The asbestos companies can put as much asbestos into the air as they like. This is slowly being challenged not by the asbestos industry or

government, but by a group of determined residents in Cork, Eire. Their courageous actions will have helped people in similar situations all over the world.

Raybestos Manhattan 'S

asbestos factory in Cork, Ireland. (Alan J.F. Dalton)

. Ovens

i n Cork Raybestos- Manhatten of the USA, with much help from the Irish Development Authority (IDA), have built a £4 millon factory to manufacture 10 million disc brake pads a year. These are mainly intended for export to the EEC countries. The disc brake pads will contain 25 to 50 per cent white (Chrysotile) asbestos. After some delay (planning permission was granted three days before Christmas 1975) the residents got themselves organised and created a stink about the factory. Through a combination of a specialist report (produced by a committee elected at a

meeting of 500) on the hazards to the community and by direct action tactics (the women's action group picketed the American Embassy in Dublin) the residents have aroused public

Cork

Women from Oven 's Action Group picket the US Embassy in Dublin during 1977. (Lensmen)

Case one: An asbestos factory in Cork, Eire

213

interest and feeling against the factory. The big argu-

ment for Raybestos is one

hundred jobs in a town that needs them — although not as much as many other Irish towns. Yet even so, when the

local radio interviewed people at the Cork labour exchange, the comments1 were about equally for and

against the factory: It should start up... being out of work isn't good for your health either...l've worked in worse places than that; Of course the residents

are right, they should

fight for their rights like... It's supposed to be very dangerous stuff like, en it?.. .Would you live beside it? Would

you live beside it? Would yer?

According to the planning permission requirements the stated emission of asbestos from the plant will be 371 million asbestos

fibres per minute per 24- hour day from a chimney roughly the height of a two-

storey house. When diluted with the intended 13,000 cubic feet of air this will lead to an asbestos emission concentration of 1 fibre per ml of air. Using information 2

from the US Department of Health, Connecticut it is

possible to calculate approximately that this emission level will lead to a ground concentration of asbestos in

the air of 60 nanograms of

214

asbestos per cubic metre of air. Air samples taken by the Irish Institute for Industrial Research and Standards and analysed by Dr A.N. Rohl at Professor

Selikoff's laboratory in the USA in May 1977, have

shown that the background level of asbestos in the air on the Beverly Estate near

the factory is 0.8 ng per cubic metre of air. Therefore the background level of asbestos will rise 75 times (from 0.8 to 60). With no safe level of asbestos known, the residents clearly have

grave cause for concern. It is

worth remembering that this

factory is claimed to be 'the most modern and safest

asbestos factory iii the world'. If this is the safest, what are the rest like?

In fact the most recent planning permission granted will allow up to 10,000 times the background level of asbestos in the air around the factory in Cork. The factory finally got into production in late 1978, but the com-

pany have refused to give the local residents the results of the tests on asbestos levels around the factory.3 Whilst it seems that the residents have lost in this round, there is no doubt that their actions have

forced many authorities throughout the world —

not least Raybestos (see

p.157) — to reconsider the hazard of asbestos. As the

story of the dumping at Cork (see p.222) indicates the fight against Raybestos may not be over yet.

1 'Putting the brake on asbestos', Science for People, BSSRS magazine,

No.36, 1977. 2 Journal of theAir Pollution Control

Association, vol 25, 1975, p.1207. 3 'Pollution versus jobs', Magill (Ireland current affairs monthly magazine), August 1978,

Typical asbestos waste dumping site. (HSE)

All the millions of tons of asbestos that have been ripped out of the earth and spread around everywhere, in the name of profit, have got to go back there some day. The sooner the better, but this is easier said than done. As the Greater London Council stated1 as early as February 1975:

In London, in 1973, 14,000 tons (of asbestos) required disposal... It should be stressed that the number of landfill sites where asbestos waste can be deposited, accessible to London, is rapidly dwindling and that the proper disposal of asbestos in the London area therefore presents a very real problem.

One of the major demolition contractors, Mr N.C. Cropper, gave evidence to the government's Advisory Committee on Asbestos. He spoke of the fact that the demolition and stripping of asbestos is 'still largely a primitive procedure' and that there is a tendency to use 'irresponsible operators' for cheapness. He spoke of the tremendous amount of asbestos waste being received daily, of which there is no record, and gave as an example the amount of asbestos that would be handled in dismantling a power station: 100,000 bags of asbestos waste. Finally he commented2:

We are experiencing difficulty in local disposal of bagged asbestos as toxic waste. Briefly, some council tips will have no

1 GLC materials development bulletin. No.82, February 1975. 2 'Selected written evidence to the Advisory Committee on Asbestos 1976-77', UMSO, 1977, p.70.

215

Dumping asbestos

In May 1979 the Depart- ment of the Environment published a Code of Practice for the disposal of asbestos

waste (Waste Management Paper No.18, DoE, HMSO, 1979; 75p). No trade unionists sat on the committee that produced this Code. The asbestos industry was well represented. Even

if enforced there is no evidence that it 'vilI ade-

quately protect disposal

operatives, people or crops living near asbestos dumps. If conditions are really bad

it may be of some help and

it is an improvement over the Asbestos Research

Council's Code which it replaces.

216

dealings with this material, which often results in expensive lengthy transportation involving specialised waste containers. This

applies mostly outside recognised industrial areas, and I see no reason why far more local council tips are not licensed to accept bagged asbestos waste. Failure to achieve this will obviously be an incentive to the small operators to avoid the high charges of specialised waste transporters, especially for small quantities, and lead to illegal tipping.

He clearly has an important point. This fly-by- night tipping is certainly going on and no doubt it will increase unless something is done. Asbestos is notifiable toxic waste under the Deposition of Poisonous Waste Act 1972. This Act penalises 'the depositing on land of poisonous, noxious or

polluting waste so as to give an environmental hazard', makes 'offenders liable for any resultant

damage', and imposes penalties for contra- vention: a on summary conviction, of a fine of £400 or six months in prison; b on conviction on indictment, of imprisonment for not more than five years, or a fine, or both. Anyone removing or depositing a notifiable waste — such as asbestos — must inform the local council of their intentions, giving three clear working days' notice. For breaking these notification regulations you can be fined not more than £400.

How is asbestos dumped? It depends on who is dumping it. Waste dumping in general is done very crudely and usually as

cheaply as possible. This means that health and safety, both for operators and those living near

by, is disregarded. Since up to 80 per cent of the total disposal cost may arise from the transport operations, it is not surprising to find that many private tips are run by Road Transport Opera- tors. Surveys3 have shown that conditions for the operators at these tips are criminal.


Asbestos in sealed bags as required by the Code of Practice. (HSE)

Typical dust cloud from ripping asbestos waste. Plastic bags will clearly burst. (HSE)

in the foreground is seen a dust sampler on a tipping site. (HSE)

217

In 1906 Cape Asbestos (now Cape Industries) built an

asbestos factory at Bow, East London. In 1913 this factory moved to Barking. East London. It closed down in 1968. The factory em-

ployed many thousands of people and hundreds of them have died from asbestos-related diseases. 1

The company doctor, Dr Wi. Smither, reviewing the slaughter in 19652 noted that deaths were the same in 1960-64 as they were in

1930-34; although symptoms were not so bad before death and the work force was larger. What was his suggestion to control the deadly disease2 'Perhaps this is an industry which should be engaged in only by older men'. The idea

being that by the time you got the cancer you would be dead. (Hopefully?)

A woman who worked for less than a year, in 1927, at Cape's asbestos factory in

Barking, died in 1978 frorT

asbestosis. She had suffered from disabling lung disease for some time. A witness at the inqui-'st, Professor Keith Simpson, commented,'l have

known people who only worked in the factory for an afternoon to suffer the disease.3 ('Asbestos dust

took 51 years to kill', Guardian 12 May 1978)

Case two: Asbestos in the back

garden of Henry Steggles

— Henry Steggles with shovelful of asbestos from his hack garden in 1977. (The Guardian)

2i

Ann Wendrop worked there in the 1930s. At the age of 17 she and her first husband went courting on the asbestos dump. 'My husband was a waste boy, he used to take the waste Out to the dump, and we used to sit on the mounds.' Most of her family had worked at the factory. Her husband and uncle died of asbestosis. Her mother died at the early age of 48 of cancer. Her sister and sister-in-law both have asbestos is.

In 1938 twenty terrace council houses were built on the asbestos dump and in the late 1960s a large estate of council flats was built on the former factory site. By September 1977 a

pensioner, Henry Steggles, who lived in the council houses, was digging up lumps of asbestos with his spade. His wife Ivy informed the local council Environ- mental Health Department. Nothing much was done

and the tenants had to go on a rent strike with signs in their houses: NO ASBESTOS REMOVED — NO RENT PAID.

By July 1978— six months later — it seemed ironically as if Cape's would get the contract to remove the killer dust. On 'very reasonable' terms of course: 1,500 tons of deadly contaminated asbestos had to be removed and most 'approved' sites would not handle this amount of toxic waste. The waste was to be carried loose covered by tarpaulin, not bagged as required by the Code of Practice. This resulted in a threatened strike by workers at one dump site who, rightly, would only handle bagged asbestos waste.4 As they say, from the cradle to the grave.

1 'Predictions of mortality from Mesothelial tumours in asbestos factory workers', British Journal of Industrial Medicine, vol 33, 1976, p.147. 2 'Secular changes in asbestosis in an asbestos factory', Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol 132, 1965, p. 166. 3 'Asbestos dust took 51 years to ki11, Guardian 12 May 1978.

4 a Angela Singer, 'Blue asbestos found in garden near former asbestos factory site', Guardian, 20 January, 1978;

b Angela Singer, 'Council caught in asbestos dilemma', Guardian, 6 July 1978.

P1:77- THP'T MPJ

Of\i THE REDL,'HDANCY L13r 8EFOrE HE OF 3UING

1)5

219

2 Z()

Bychance,on 19 May 1977, the residents of the Fleet Estate, Dartford, Kent, found out that an

application had been filed with the local council to dump asbestos near Fleet down school on the estate.

The Fleetdown Residents

Association and other groups formed an Anti- Asbestos Dumping Group. Their main objections were:

1 Close proximity of proposed asbestos dump to the school; 2 The life of the dump, at present used to tip non-toxic waste, is al roOst ox ha is nd

3 The original application for the dump was

granted before the school was built, 4 The Asbestos Industry Code of Practice on the

dumping of asbestos is

not strict enough; 5 Accidents happen. e would not have our children's lives put in danger. After two months of active campaigning they were successful and the corn pany, D & H (Reclamation) Ltd. withdrew their applica tion 'for the continuation of our good relations with the local residents'. Noteworthy is the fact that the local and county council were prepared to go ahead with the dump. Ftulh

., / -

Gates to entry of pro- Case three: posed asbestos tip. (Alan J.P. Dalton) Kent residents stop

asbestos dump

councils were generally obstructive to the residents — giving them short notice of meetings, awkward times, splitting meetings and so on. The Community Health Council played no part in helping the residents. Only the fact that they were fairly well organised before the action helped them keep people informed on what was going on and when. Mrs Gilda Curtiss, leader of the Anti-Asbestos Dumping Group, claimed the decision was 'a victory for common sense'. But common sense was only found when the people of the estate got together and acted, and she added, 'We would have fought this application to the bitter end, and if necessary, stood across the tip gates to stop the vehicles going in'.

Diary of Events

19 May 1977: Application by D & H (Reclamation) Ltd to dump asbestos in an existing pit they had for non-toxic waste near Fleet- down Primary School. Small notice appears in the local paper — 21 days to object. Only headmistress of Fleetdown objects. 24 May: Dartford Borough Council Planning and Transport Committee meet and recommend the application be accepted to the full council. Note: this was only 5 days after the notice first appeared.

End of May: A petition of 900 signatures objecting to the site sent to Kent County Council.

13 June: Dartford Borough Council approve application and pass it onto Kent County Council. Sub- committee of latter, because of strong local opposition, agree to see protesters at the pit on 16 July. 11 July: All objectors receive just 48 hours notice about a public meeting at 3 pm that is three miles from the pit. Protests are made to the council and they agree to hold the meeting in a hall opposite the school. Much effort at such short notice put into advertising the meeting.

13 July: About 300 mother attend meeting to protest not only about the site but also about the timing of the meeting — people who were working could not get to the meeting. Meeting was closed as hall got over- crowded. An evening meeting in a larger hail was promised.

14 July: Daily Mirror contacted and runs a story on protest under heading: 'Mum's Fury at Death Dust Plan'.

Middle of July: Anti- Asbestos Dumping Group formed to unite protests of local residents groups, clubs, nurseries. BSSRS Work Hazards Group contacts residents and offers help and

advice as a result of Daily Mirror article.

July/August: Letters written to local councillors, council and company to inform them of protest. 4 August: Kent County Council inform residents' groups of meeting on 16 August, to be split into two; one formal' in the afternoon and one in the evening. The residents were against this split, wanting a public meeting. Also, they did not want it in August when many people, including the school staff, were on holiday. Councils ignores these requests.

ilAugust: D & H (Reclam- ation) Ltd withdraw their application to dump asbestos, 'for the continuation of good relations with the local residents'.

221

Typical hole in fence, near school, used by children to get into the tip to play. (Alan J.P. Dalton)

Case four:

Dumping asbestos in Cork

We have already described how the residents in Cork are fighting the continued

operation of the 'cleanest disc brake pad factory in the

world' (p.213). But two groups of residents are also

concerned about the dump-

ing of asbestos waste from the factory. The factory will produce about 100

kilos of waste, containing about 25 per cent asbestos,

every day. The first plan was to tip the waste in a site within two miles of the factory, but the company abandoned this site, they claimed, in the interests of harmony with the local community. But as one mother said, 'It was not until we kicked up a

stink that they moved the site'. The next application for an

asbestos dump site was made

at Ringaskiddy — 23 miles from the factory through the city Cork (where the asbestos waste would have

to travel). Having learned

from the Beverly residents'

fight the Ringaskiddy Residents Association quickly produced an eight- point programme in February 1977:

Ringaskiddy Residents Association (incorporating Shanbally, Raffee, Coolrnore, Raheens, Barnahealy and

Lough berg) Having considered all the

developments relating to

222

the planning application for an asbestos waste

dump at Barnahealey, Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork, we outline hereunder an

Eight Point Programme to ensure that this is not

imposed on the community 1 Any approval by Cork County Council will be appealed to the new Appeals Authority set up by the Minister for Local Government; 2 Should approval be

granted contrary to the majority decision of Cork County Council, section 4 of the Plan-

ning Act will be invoked; 3 Ratepayers in the above areas will with- hold payment of rates and we will recommend similar action to the

many other communities who have publicly supported us;

4 Pickets will be placed on Connolly Hall by trade union members resident in our areas

whose wishes were not

represented by the current action of the ITGWU; 5 Pickets will also be

placed on the IDA offices, the County Hall and premises of other bodies supporting the action; 6 Contractors involved in the transport of the waste and the site exca-

vation will also be picket ed,

7 IntheeventofaflY

attempt to commence dumping we will re-

comment that the

parents withdraw their children from the National Schools of Shanbally and

Ringaskiddy, in view of the proximity of these schools to the site; 8 wewilltakeany further steps necessary

to ensure that the wishes of the community will be complied with. We trust that common- sense will prevail and that the Authorities will heed the massive number of bona fide objectors tO

the application. Planning permission for the

dump was granted by Cork

County Council after four and a half hours of heated

debate: 27 for and 17

against. The residents went through the costly process of appeal. It was costly in the sense that they had to bring over their own experts and employ a barrister to counter the massive amount of bought expertise avail-

able to the company and the Irish government. This was

financed by local collec- tions, which in good weeks could reach £100— some indication of the feelings of the local community against the dump. In Sep- tember 1977 the result of the appeal was announced: for the dump. There had

been some improvements in the (:OflditiOflS for planning appeal (see box p.224) but

in view of the hazards stiH present (and the fact that planning conditions were easily broken — for exdr'lpIe the near by Penn Chemical factory was releasing ueadly Methyl Mercaptan

atmosphere) the residents rejected this planning permission They therefore started Picketing the site to prevent any work being done on it in accordance with the planning permission threatened to withdraw 186 children from the nearby schools and supported the residents of Ovens in their fight against the factory. The fight against the dump continued through the early

months of 1978 and came to a head in May 1978. Raybestos supported by twenty five police (gardai) tried to dump some asbestos on the site. They were faced by 200 protesters and 80 school-children There were 'scuffles and nine people were treated in hospital with one ten-year-old staying overnight. Mr Ted Forde, chairman of the Ringaskiddy Residents' Association, commented, 'It's clear now we live in a police state'.

After a sustained propaganda campaign during 1978 the residents were finally worn down and the factory is now in production. 'Independent experts' have figured strongly in this fight. Nearly all these experts are closely related to the

asbestos industry, if not actually employed by them, a fact which has not always been admitted in the statements by the same experts. Although on the surface a failure, there is no doubt that the courageous actions of the Cork people in fighting the Irish government, a multinational company, and the blackmail of jobs versus health (which has made the trade union take a very back- ward-looking, if understand- able, position) has led to a major reconsideration of the hazards of asbestos. This has extended beyond Ireland to the EEC and America and in fact the whole world. And, of course, the story may not be finished yet. In the fight against the killer asbestos the People of Cork have done their bit. What about the rest of us?

223

- -

The police ('Gardai') trying to force a way through the picket line for contractors, hired by Raybestos, to dump asbestos in May 1978. (Donal Sheehan)

Outlines of improved planning conditions for asbestos dumps in Cork

1 waste from Raybestos only for the dumping as for II

Manhattan only of asbestos waste

2 use to discontinue use to be discontinued as for II with the following

after: when planning authorily additions: if the results of

is 'satisfied that monitoring show increases of

pollutant is emanating 'three orders of magnitude

from disposal area (103) 'or 1000 X then if not corrected within six months site to be closed

a 7 years; b when waste within

2.3 metre of ground level, or as a result of monitoring, any pollutant (liquid or solid) emanates

3 a 2.4 metre (7-8 ft) as for I with addition as for II

high security fence is to of warning signs

be erected. Entrance

gate to be securely locked

4 process waste to be as for II

wetted and transported in sealed watertight containers

enclosed in sealed metal containers. Pellets to be

non-friable and capable of withstanding a force of

kg per 1/2" x 1/2 pellet

5 all other waste to be minimum gauge of poly- as for II

transported in sealed thene bags to be 500

bags in metal containers

6 immediately after backfill with clay to a as for II

dumping the whole waste minimum of 150mm

shall be covered with earth to a minimum depth of 300 mm and

completed within one hour

7 a schedule of dumping as for I; plus council as for Il; with no dumping

arrangements shall be officers to have access outside these times

given to the council, at any time and to have

Details of operatives' a key to the gate

protective equipment and clothing shall be

given to the council

224

Plan I (near factory 1976) September 1976

Plan II (A ingaskiddy) March 1977

Plan III Ringaskiddy on appeal, September 1977

pelletised waste to be

P/an I (cont) P/an II (cont) P/an III (cont)

8 Raybestos Manhattan regular air monitoring monthly of shall arrange regular air to be done by a

testing asbestos in air and

and water monitoring 'competent and by electron

microscopy and give results to independent person', (transmission)

for the first council Results to be given at

three-monthly intervals

six months and then at intervals to be agreed with council. Weather conditions to be noted

9 access to site shall cost of access to be be safe and adequate borne by developer

10 details of dumping series of trenches not as for II; with addition procedure: exceeding:

that trenches must in

none 2.5 metres deep; 1.5 metres wide; minimum centre to centre of 2.5 metre. Depth of waste shall not be nearer the top of trench than 600mm, Nearest trench may come to boundary is 10 ft.

run a direction and may be no nearer the top than 500mm, No dumping if water in trenches is more than 300 mm deep. At not more than monthly intervals, trenches to be made up to original ground level

11 on completion of use of site it shall be seeded with suitable grass seed. Stream to be piped total length and the boundaries to be planted with ever- green trees

within six months of start- up a scheme shall be submitted to the council for the 'regrading of the site'

12 abondshallbe asforl asforl deposited with the council to ensure compliance with conditions

225

Case five: Dumping asbestos

'officially' The only site licensed to dump blue asbestos in Kent is the Lenesta tip in Rainham. Conditions at the tip were courageously re-

vealed by bulldozer driver John Mitchell in the Evening Standard in 1976.

I want the facts about this to come out. This asbestos comes here in lorries and often the load

is spilt. I can't always cover it immediately. There just isn't enough earth on the site to do it. Look at all the fruit around here. You don't know how dangerous it is to do that, do you? There is a housing estate nearby and when the wind blows in a

particular way off the sea, it is particularly exposed to the dust. Children could slip through a hole in the gate or crawl under it to get onto the site.

A Kent County Council spokesman said they were 'perfectly happy a good standard of waste disposal had been achieved on this tip'. He admitted there had

been cases where the polythene bags split open and

that blue asbestos had been

dumped on the site without a county inspector in attend- ance. He did say that they made inspections under the

Deposit of Poisonous

to time.

The managing director of Lenesta, Terence Barwick, admitted; 'The number of broken bags on the lorries does bother me... it is

oossible that asbestos dust can get into the environment.' The management have now issued John Mitchell with a dust mask

and respirator

There is 'Recommended Code of Practice for the

Handling and Disposal of Asbestos Waste Materials' produced by the Asbestos industry front organisation, the Asbestos Research Council. This is the standard most councils work too. The same old story of the asbes-

tos industry setting its own standard. But as one of the studies said: 'Compliance with the Code was very variable'. The regulations need to be rightened up urgently. The conditions won (see p.224) by the residents in Cork provide the bare minimum for immediate safer tipping. In

the long term the really safe disposal of asbestos

waste, like nuclear waste

(though in this case we shouldn't be producing it at all), needs a lot more

thought and action. It would be better to alter the asbes-

tos fibres, by high temperature or chemical means,1 to a safer substance to transport and dump where pos-

some way to doing this in

Cork by pelletising some of the waste. Why not all? It is

interesting that Dr Stephen Holmes of the British asbestos industry has said2

that the pelletising method had been looked into in Britain but not been introduced because of cost. Cost before health again.

If the asbestos cannot be

made safer then the best

thing to do with it would be to dump it into the bottom of disused mines: back where it came from into the bowels of the earth. This is done in

Germany. At the moment most dumping is done near

the surface. They have been

dumping it in South Africa for years and studies report,3 'The (asbestos) fibre has a

tendency to creep towards the surface, and the covering must be continually repeated.' Also there is

every chance that asbestos

buried in only a few feet of earth may be disturbed at some future date by the

unsuspecting.

1 Paul Ase, 'Asbestos manufacturing waste

disposal and utilisation', US ITT Research

Institute, 1976. 2 'IDA bring in

expert on asbestos', Irish Times, 7 Jurie,1978. 3 'Annual report of the South African Goverm ment', Department of Mines, 1973.

Waste Act 1972 from time sible. Raybestos have gone

226

Case six: Dumping asbestos waste near flats and a nursery

There is a lot of pressure to dump asbestos waste on any old bit of waste ground. That is what happened in Union Grove, Lambeth, South London. On 2 August 1977 firemen from B21 Fire Station, Clapham, were called to a wood fire on the site. They found bags marked 'Blue asbestos — do not inhale dust'.

Some of the bags were split open. The firemen damped down the dust and informed Lambeth council. The council acted quickly and got a specialist firm — Envirocor Ltd of Lichfield — to remove the waste asbestos.

Most of the press reports concentrated on how safely this clean up was done and then went on to ask who had dumped the waste. (Guard/an 5 August 1977. Evening Standard 4 August 1977. Safety and Rescue September 1977) The local councillor's press and other authorities thought the cleanup safe.

There is no doubt that Envirocor are one of the better equipped asbestos

___________ removal firms. Even so, the following points were noted: A typical press photo of

protected Envirocor men clearing-up asbestos waste. The split-open bags and Part of a white-wash? asbestos waste at Union (AM/Keystone) Grove. (Morning Star)

227

1 The site was only 'fenced- off' with tape, and workmen, who were unprotected, were still on the site

during cleanup;

2 A children's nursery only a few yards from the site was allowed to remain

open while men in full breathing apparatus cleaned the site;

3 Afterthesitewas pronounced clean it was

still possible to pick up brown asbestos (confirmed by analysis) on the site;

4 The waste asbestos was

just dumped in skips with inadequate covering. These

skips, six in all, went all the

way to an approved site in

Surrey. How many more

people were needlessly exposed in this way?

Clearly the precautions taken were inadequate, and it is hard not to have

the feeling that one day of 'good precautions' was

laid on for the press.

above:

Men protected against asbestos dust damping down waste. Note the closeness of passers-by and tape to stop(!) adults and children getting onto the site. Council/or Prentice some weeks later claimed the site had been

fully fenced off with corrugated sheet before the asbestos was dumped! What bullshit. (Fleet Fotos)

Men working on adjacent building site during cleanup of asbestos waste with no proleCtion. (Morning Star)

228

Asbestos waste poorly covered on its way through the streets of London to a dumping site. (Eve Barker)

Who dumped it? We shall never know. At first, because bags were found with the name Red land Purle on them, this firm was thought to be the culprit, but after some considerable searching this was shown not to be so. What the investigation did show up was the confusion over the checking of the dumping of asbestos waste. Both Kent County Coun- cil and Redland Purle are at fault; although it is most likely that a similar situation exists all over Britain. These movements of deadly asbestos are supposed to be notified by law, but evi- dently councils are not taking their job seriously. This shows the need for trade unionists to be concerned about where the waste asbestos from their factory goes and to check that it is disposed of safely. Because of these and other concerns a meeting of local residents (opposite

229

Local children standing against tape that 'stops' them going into contaminated area. (Morning Star)

Covering over asbestos waste in skips insufficient (Eve Barker)

the site is the 800-home Springfields GLC estate) was called jointly by Lambeth Trades Council and Lambeth branch of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) on 15 August 1977.

To the surprise of the

secretary of the Spring- fields Tenants Association (before the meeting she

had said, 'they'll only turn out for bingo') about fifty concerned and angry residents turned up at the

meeting. They asked their councillors

why no tenants were told of the dangers. CouncillOr Derek Prentice replied that the council's earlier information blackout had been

to avoid 'unnecessary

panic'. (Moning Star 17

August 1977)

Another question concerned why corrugated iron had

been put up around the site two days after the asbestos

was dumped: fit had been

present before there would have been no dumping in the first place. Councillor Prentice replied that the fence was there before the

dumping: a blatant lie as

the tenants well knew and the photos show. Other

questions concerned the cleanup operation. Brian

Hodges (ASLEF), President of Lambeth Trades Council, held up a piece of asbestos

(later confirmed to be so

by analysis) that he had

picked up off the 'clean' site when coming to the

230

meeting. The chairwoman of the local Community Health Council stood up and told the tenants they had nothing to fear as here

she was perfectly healthy and she'd worked for Cape Asbestos for twenty years She was jeered at, quite rightly. The tenants asked the councillors, their

experts and apologists to leave the meeting early, and decided on some action: to draw up a petition and

distribute it on the estate.

This petition was written and distributed by the Socialist Workers Party (SWP), but never collected.

The council took further air samples and wrote to Lambeth Trades Council

saying that there was no trace of asbestos in the area.

The Trades Council asked

for a copy of the report and the method used to take the samples, but they got no reply.

Had the tenants been better

organised before the dumping they could have forced the council to fence off the waste ground — a danger to children in any case — and

so have prevented the event even occurring. Clearly the council, although they went some

way to cleaning up the asbestos fully, did not do enough, and they would not admit their mistakes when faced with them by the tenants. Likewise both

the Lambeth Trades Coun-

cil and the local Socialist Workers Party branch made some attempt to

help the tenants to organ ise,

but did not follow the actions through with enough effort to get the council to finally make

good. Such actions would have established precedents for further confrontations between the tenants and

the council officials which are sure to come. But the end result, a meet-

ing of around fifty people, aggressive, confident and

angry, who confront their faceless councillors and

officials can't be bad. On

top of that quite a few people at the meeting with the councillors expressed interest in joining the

previously dormant tenants' association.

right:

The way the asbestos was

supposed to have been dumped — in sealed containers on the day the press came. (Envirocor)

Brian Hodges, President of Lambeth Trades Council, showing photos of Union Grove site unfenced to local meeting of residents (Officers of the council in the front row). (Andrew Wiard, Report)

231

232

Chapter 13 Compensation

There is of course no compensation for the

suffering caused by industrial diseases. That is

why most of this book is about prevention. But clearly there are many people who will suffer and are suffering from asbestos-related diseases. You might think for such unfortunates there would be no problem in gaining some

compensation for their ruined health, but you would be wrong. The path to gaining some form of compensation is covered in obstacles.

If you are in a trade union use them. That's part of what you pay your union dues for. If not contact a local law centre if you have one near-

by. Failing that you will need the advice of a solicitor. Some of the organisations listed in the section on help (Appendix 1, p.260) may be able to recommend friendly solicitors with experience of asbestos cases.

One or two books are listed in the further reading list (Appendix 2, p. 264) that may help you in this confusing area.

The following comments are in no way a guide to the gaining of compensation. They are added

mainly as case studies to indicate that some

things can be done even in this depressing area of asbestos-related diseases. There are two ways you can obtain some form of compensation if

you are suffering from an asbestos-related disease:

A recent study of 50 people with the deadly asbestos cancer — Mesotheijoma —

around the shipyards at Barrow-in-Furness showed that the DHSS were paying compensation to only 21 patients or their widows. Less than half! The average time of death from first diagnosis was six months. (Thorax vol 33 1978 p.26)

One asbestosis victim who has been awarded £14,000 by Cape Asbestos has been refused compensation by the DHSS five times! ('Dusty answers on the road to a pension', Angela Singer, Guardian, 2.4.1979)

a Everyone who pays a National Insurance stamp is entitled to some form of payment if they are injured at work or suffer from one of fifty recognised industrial diseases (asbestosis and Mesothelioma are such diseases). b You may sue the company that caused your suffering through the process of common law.

Doing one thing does not stop you doing the other. The money you get will (or should!) come quicker from the government than by suing, but the common law method may give you more in a lump sum. All quite simple you may think, but it is not. Between 1969 and 1976 the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS) have diagnosed at their medical boards almost 1,200 cases of asbestosis. Quite a lot you might think, but there is plenty of evidence that this is only a fraction of the real number of deserving cases. The DHSS is tight with its money and there is plenty of evidence to support this.

Typical of the situation is a man from Mytholmroyd in West Yorkshire. Cape Indus- tries' examining consultant said about him:

This man is now severely disabled and will certainly never be able to work again. This disability must be attributed to pulmonary asbestosis consequent upon his employment with the Cape Asbestos Company in 1949.

Cape therefore paid out a meagre £5,000, but the DHSS refused to pay any benefit!

John Pickering, a Manchester solicitor specialis- in in industrial injuries compensation, has said1 that he alone has about thirty cases of people who have been refused DHSS benefits even though they have the support of consultant physicians who say they are suffering from asbestosis. On 31 January 1977 the DHSS allowed the right of a limited appeal to a Medical Appeal Tribunal by those who were turned down by the DHSS Pneumoconiosis Board (the panel of DHSS doctors who decide if you're crippled or not).

1 Manchester Free Press No.33, April-May 1975.

233

Of the 3 - 5,000 applications for industrial lung disease compensation each year an incredible 3 out of 4 (75 %) are rejected. The appeal is limited to 400 sufferers each year. As one lawyer who has dealt with many asbestosis cases re- marked2

They turn down half the people I know who have asbestosis. . . cases are turned down who have received £10- 20,000 compensation from asbestos companies.. .the whole emphasis of the DHSS is to avoid paying out money. [my emphasis I

2 New Scientist, 28 October 1976, p.223.

234

After fifteen years of breathlessness and pain Moll F isher's husband, Sammy, died of lung cancer and asbestosis in December 1973. 'No one realised how he suffered', said Moll. He was 66 when he died and got his asbes-

tosis and lung (;anr;er from

working at the giant Turner and Newalls' Hindley Green factory near Wigan. TLirner and Newalls in their generosity gave her £600 arid carried on paying her hLisband'sfl a week pension, hut that stopped in June 1977, so that in 1977 sh was iving on the D HSS state pension of £15.85 a week. (Sunday Times 30 January 1977)

Mrs S. Fisher with photos Case one: of her dead husband Peanuts for your husband's Sammy Fisher. (Bryan death Wharton, Topix)

Case two: No compensation for wife crippled with asbestosis

Mary Vaughan's husband, Henry, died aged 55 of the deadly asbestos-cancer Mesothelioma. He worked for Dick's Asbestos Com- pany in Canning Town, London, for six months in 1936. After a grim six- month illness, during which time he perspired so much that his pyjamas had to be changed six times a day. He died in 1971.Worsewas to

come: Mary found that she had the symptoms of asbestosis herself. Probably caught from Henry when she brushed off the asbestos dust from his clothes every day after he finished his asbestos pipe-sawing. But she cannot claim compensation because the DHSS scheme only applies to those who get asbestosis 'arising out of employment on or after the 5 July1948'. She did claim for her husband's death from the

state pneumoconiosis scheme and was awarded the maximum — £300. Beyond this the DHSS has given her 55p a week above the ordinary widow's pension as an industrial death benefit. She also gets allowances for the special diet she has to have and a heating allowance. She is troubled by what she saw her husband go through: 'I saw it all and I don't want any of that'. (New Society 27 January 1977)

In their 1976 glossy handout: 'Asbestos — miracle fibre or killer dust?' the asbestos industry public relations organisation, the Asbestos Information Committee state:

Sadly, existing sufferers can only be helped by good medical care and fair compensation to them and their dependants. This the asbestos industry has willingly undertaken and many millions of pounds have been paid, both in direct compensation and in maintaining the earnings of employees transferred to lighter, less exposed work.

Turner and Newall, the asbestos industry giants, after much pressure have increased from £1 to £6 a week its 'Ex Gratia Allowances paid during the pleasure of the board of directors'. Accord- ing to those who have a fair knowledge of this compensation (see Nancy Tait's Asbestos Kills), the sums awarded are pretty miserable. A typical case is that of Cathy Hughes: I get the paltry pension of £15.85 a week

from the state for the death of my man aged 54. I got nothing, not even a card of sympathy, from Turner and Newalls. I had everything I could want in my life at one time. Then you took my man. You forced me out to work. And he got just £500 compensation for his stolen years. He

235

Cathy Hughes. (Phil McCowen)

James Moore worked for 12

different companies as an

insulation engineer during his 42-year working life. He died of asbestosis and lung cancer. According to his wife, Margaret Moore, 'He was never well. He couldn't eat or drink without feeling ill, but it was not until 1974 that he was x-rayed and the doctors discovered

he had lung cancer caused

by asbestosis.' In April 1979 she was awarded £17,000 compensation against the 12 companies. (Daily Telegraph, 3.4.1979; Guardian, 3.4.1979>

236

was threatened that if the case went to court he'd likely get nothing. To see a man dying from the disease Turner and Newall

gave him is too terrible for words. I sat day and night with him dying in the bed.

(Socialist Worker 30 April 1977)

There is no doubt that it is cheaper for the asbestos industry to pay these paltry sums of 'compensation' for the murder they commit rather than make safer products. Small wonder an article on compensation for asbestos diseases can conclude:

All in all, the family of an asbestos victim finds formidable difficulties before it. Usually, the wife is exhausted from nursing the dying husband. Usually, the family lacks the knowledge or finance to get through the thicket of DHSS regulations or to hire solicitors with enough industrial knowledge to tackle the employers. The odds are weighed heavily towards the asbestos companies — they hold the man's medical records and his X-ray results, and they have good lawyers. (New Society 27 January 1977)

We have seen (p.157) that the 1978 'going rate' for a fit and healthy man of 54, with a wife and two children, who dies painfully and 15 to 20 years or more before his time is around £15,000.

US compensation In the US the trade unions have gone for higher awards even at some cost to themselves. In February 1978 there was an out-of-court settlement for £10.3 million (20 million dollars) awarded to 445 former asbestos workers at one plant. The sum can be broken down3 as follows: over 8,000,000: Pittsburgh Corning Glass Co (PPG) and company physician Dr Kee Grant over S1,000,000: UNARC who sold the plant to PPG in 1962 S5,200,00: Firms which supplied PPG with asbestos including Cape Industries of London S5, 750,000. various US government protection agencies for failing to inform workers of the hazards they found as early as 1964 S100,000: Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers Union (OCAW) who brought the action. This was for failing to advise their members of the hazardous conditions in the plant. There are clear differences between the US and the British common law compensation systems. It is interesting to note in the above £10 million settlement that suppliers (one being Cape in Britain) of the killer dust, company doctor, Factory Inspectorate and union in addition to the factory had to cough up. The union amount was small compared with the others, but even so it seems to have prompted them into action over asbestos. During 1977-78 they produced a comprehensive slide show, booklet and wall poster on asbestos hazards.4

3 a US Occupational Safety and Health Reporter, 1978; h 1Om paid to US asbestos workers', construction

News, 23 February 1978. 4 a 'Asbestos fighting a killer', Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union (OCAW);

h Molly Coye, 'Asbestos — its hazards and how to fight them', OCAW, 1978; c 'Asbestos', wall poster, OCAW, 1978.

237

According to one report5 the number of US

compensation claims for being crippled by asbestos-related disease has risen from a handful five years ago to over 1,000 in 1978. Total claims are said to be above 2 billion dollars. These claims have already revealed widespread know-

ledge and suppression of facts on asbestos disease by the asbestos industry. One US expert, Barry Castleman, has called the internal papers they have found, 'The Pentagon Papers [that led to Watergate] of the asbestos industry'.

5 Bill Richards, 'New data on asbestos indicate cover-up of effects on workers' ,Washington Post, November 1978.

Case three: Glasgow women fight for decent compensation

A group of Glasgow women whose husbands and other members of their families have been murdered by the asbestos industry are trying to kick the union — the TGWU — into some action. The women complain that the union 'don't even

answer your bloody letters'. 'We've finished talking to them', said Anne Cook, whose father recently died of asbestosis. 'What we need is action. We ought to

picket the sites'. The women have formed a local action committee. As one said:

We are concerned about compensation. But we are even more concerned about our men who are

still working in these conditions. They are the ones with the power to prevent asbestosis.

(Socialist Worker 21 Aug 1977)

238

Case four: Reality enters T & Ns AGM

The usually dull annual general meeting of Turner and Newalls got a shock in 1977. Protesters — rela-

tions of some of the workers Turner and Newall have murdered over the years — faced the directors with the facts.

THEY MURDER THE MEN. THEN THEY ROB THE WIDOWS.

THEY NEED AN EXTRA DIRECTOR — A FUNERAL DIRECTOR

FOR EVERY SHARE CERTIF ICATE THERE'S A DEATH CERTIFICATE

said the placards and

demonstrators. 'Blue asbestos' was poured over the chairman, Mr D.C. Burling, as he came out of the meeting. He panicked. But in fact it was only blue Daz washing powder!

Other shareholders were presented with tags that had the names of the dead

men from the Glasgow TGWU branch (see p.34). Protesters such as these

brave women need much more support from the labour movement to make them more effective. There seem to be lessons to be learnt from the US system of compensation by British trade unions. ('The death dust demo', Daily Mail 22 April 1977. Socialist Worker 30 April 1977)

right: Wives, daughters and sisters of Glasgow insulation engineers dead or dying of asbestos diseases outside the TGWU offices in August 1976. (Socialist Worker)

Demonstration at T& N's Annual General Meeting in 1977. Blue Asbestos' being poured over chairman Mr D.C. Burling. (In fact it was blue Daz!) (Daily Express)

239

240

Chapter 14 Asbestos is political

The emphasis throughout this booklet has been on providing practical advice to people faced with asbestos and its substitutes whether at work or at home. Some examples have been

given where people have fought back against the hazards of asbestos. They have often had to fight not only the asbestos industry, but the local or national government (often in the form of factory inspectors) and even their own unions in many cases. Many more people must have

given up the fight.

Despite these valiant efforts and the increasing awareness of the health hazards of asbestos, its worldwide production has been increasing fantastically. It has more than doubled between 1960 and 1976, and more is mined each year. (5,000 million kilograms) than in the years before 1930; when the real killer nature of asbestos was first extensively revealed in the British government's survey. On a rough calcu- lation we are about half way through extractin all the asbestos that's in the earth. On healt

grounds alone, all the remaining asbestos should be left in the earth and marked for future

generations of mineral miners.

DANGER ASBESTOS — DURING THE

TWENTIETH AND TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY MINING COMPANIES RUN

FOR PRIVATE GAIN KILLED MIL-

LIONS OF PEOPLE PAINFULLY BY

RELEASING AND DISTRIBUTING THIS

DEADLY MATERIAL ALL OVER THE

WORLD. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!

But we know this will not happen, not because asbestos is indispensable — this pamphlet has shown that it can be replaced in nearly all applications at present, and very shortly in all applications — but because there is a lot of money to be made, for a few people, by peddling this killer dust.

Asbestos industry profits To look just at the UK asbestos industry — Turner and Newall, Cape and British Belting Asbestos (BBA). We find profits throughout the years after the Second World War were very high — often double those of the UK manufacturing industry in general.i The profits suffered a bit of a slump in the 1 960s, in relation to the average for general industry, but recently they are up again:

Company Trading Profits (millions of £) 1974 1975 1976 1977

8,539 15,486 20,697 18,850

Source: Information from Annual Accounts, collected by the Labour Research Department

Turner and Newall Cape Industries BBA

It is obvious that the asbestos industry is doing very well even in a depressed industrial climate.

1 'Asbestos and certain asbestos products', Monopolies Commission, HMSO, 1973.

241

242

Turner and Newalls show a decreased profit for 1975 — accounted for by a seven-month strike at their Canadian Bell asbestos mine subsidiary. Of course, within these figures there are the usual inequalities:

Company A verage annual Pay of highest

pay ofemp/oyeeS director

1976 (E) 1977 () 1976 (f) 1977 (f)

Turner and NewalI 3176 3480 50,000 50,504

Cape Industries 3,448 4,008 23,552 26,178

BBA 3,281 4,416 30,000 27,000

In addition to these fat salaries the directors, of course, get all the usual company perks (cars, free travel, holidays, meals, golden handshakes). One thing they don 't get are the asbestos-related diseases. But we supply, jobs, the asbestos

industry replies — you should be grateful. As Mr

Van der Best, managing director of the Belgian- based Eternit — one of the world's largest asbestos cement manufacturers — said at the Advisory Committee on Asbestos hearings in

June 1977: I would like to tell you that the Company to which I belong, being sure that the best way to help developing countries is to erect factories in their countries, with their

help and their co-operation, has erected asbestos cement factories nearly all over the world — in South America, in Asia, and in Africa — because in fact asbestos cement is the normal follower of a cement factory; to help them solve their housing problem in those developing countries.

We have seen that the conditions in South African asbestos mines leave something to be desired.

Jobs versus health: your money or your life

This is the choice that most workers are offered when they complain of any health hazard like asbestos. This blackmail is used by employers very successfully. They have used the TU members in the British asbestos industry to get

pro-asbestos resolutions passed at union con- ferences and to argue within the TUC for the 20,000 British asbestos workers against the millions of trade unionists exposed to asbestos. And to some extent this lobbying has worked. The TUC oral evidence to the government Advisory Committee on Asbestos was weaker than the good written submission of six months earlier. The trade unionists who testified for the asbestos industry and defended the safe level that will allow up to one in ten workers exposed to it to die were very vocal. They also spent most of their time in the bar and refused to see their fellow trade unionists — insulation workers — who were suffering from the effects of the 'safe' products they made. Divide and rule. And the bosses will laugh all the way to the bank while workers cry to the grave. We have seen in Sweden (p.47) how trade unionists taking this stand of 'asbestos is good' have been rewarded with unemployment when it suited the companies. They could have pushed for work on safer alternatives, but didn't until it was too late. Another frequent threat, and a realistic one too as the US experience has shown (p.245), is for the company to move away to a country with less well organised workers and hence more hazardous working conditions. This can only be countered by workers of all countries seeing that they have more in common with each other — despite differences of culture, habits, language, colour, etc — than with their bosses and political representatives that support such systems. Clearly people all over the world must control their own lives and the institutions that they work in for the benefit of all and not the few. Since very early on, the asbestos industry has used the blackmail of unemployment to fight against regulations on the use and manufacture of their deadly material. We'll close the factory and you'll be out of work, they threatened. And this they did. But asbestos manufacture wasn't closed down — the industry just chose new victims elsewhere.

243

Case one: 1930 export of asbestos

hazard to France

When the first British legislation controlling asbes-

tos production was passed in 1931 , Turner and Newall set up plants in north west France. They bought up small textile factories which were well-established in the region. Turner and

Newall did not have to worry about any asbestos

safety legislation, since the first French regulations on asbestos dust levels did not appear until 1976.

The Ferodo asbestos

factories in France still belong to Turner and Newall, as well as to.several banks. It is the main source of employment in the region. If the firm closed its factories, 18,000 people would be thrown out of work. When the unions at

Ferodo demanded safe

working conditions, the

company did its best to block the demands, using the threat of unemployment. By 1976 the fight had

continued for 15 years. Dust levels had fallen by about two thirds since the early 1960s, but unsafe procedures and inadequate protection were still being used. In addition, all work had been speeded up, making safe handling impossible.

The workers were joined in their struggle by the local

244

opposed to the savage

dumping of asbestos in the

neighbourhood of the factories. At least 10,000 tonnes were lying exposed and going into the water supply. The company denied any health hazard

either inside or outside the

plant. They claimed that any case of asbestosis came

from old conditions and

that it was possible that even those workers had

some 'predisposition' to asbestosis. Ferodo also

claimed that 'to its knowledge, the number of cancers among its workforce was the same as

among people not exposed to asbestos'. But it refused

to give evidence for these

statements. It blocked any attempt at an inquiry into the numbers of deaths of

possible causes. The town council sided with the

company, ignoring the

strong arguments of the unions and community groups for greater precautions and control of asbes-

tos. Strangely enough, the councillor responsible for environmental problems was also the safety officer of the Ferodo company.

The pressure from the workers and the community eventually succee-

ded in improving disposal

procedures, but conditions inside the factory are only slowly getting better. The struggle at Ferodo still continues.

community, who were workers in the firm and

Filthy and dangerous conditions in the French asbestos industry.

US asbestos industry exports hazards Since the early l970s it has been clear to the US asbestos industry that regulations would be tightened up. Although they successfully delayed the lowering of the hygiene level from 5 to 2 fibres per ml for almost four years, the writing was on the wall, so they started getting out into South America where the regulations were non- existent and the workforce desperate and docile: the hazard was exported. Barry Castleman, a US Occupational Health Consultant, has documented2 this export: Mexico has twenty-three asbestos plants, one built in 1932, one in 1962 and the rest after 1965. Exports to the US of asbestos textiles have increased from 180 pounds in 1969 to 1,200,000 pounds in 1973. There are no asbestos mines in Mexico.

An advert in Construction Brazil: US imports of asbestos textiles from News in 1976 pushing Brazil have soared from 11,000 pounds in 1970 Singapore. Cheap labour, to 545,000 pounds in 1973. poorly organised, low Venezuela: US imports from this country were health standards and so

practically zero in 1968-70, but by 1973 they had risen to 173,000 pounds. Taiwan: the exports of asbestos textiles have risen from 200,000 pounds in 1970 to 1,100,000 in 1973. Korea: there is some evidence that this country is beginning to supply the US with asbestos products, but no figures are available.

2 a 'The export of hazardous factories to developing nations',Barry Castleman, Environmental Consultant, 1738 Riggs Place, North West, Washington, DC 20009, USA, 7 March 1978;

b 'Dying for Work — Occupational Health and Asbestos', NACLA, vol 12, March-April 1978.

245

Case two: Asbestos dust hits a

Mexican town

At the suggestions of t3arry Castleman Dr William Johnson, an industrial health specialist from the University of Washington, and Gail

Yoakum, a reporter on

the Arizona Daily Star, looked at an asbestos

factory in the Mexican border town of Agua Prieta. Agua Prieta is a

twin city to Douglas, which is an Arizona copper smelting community. The asbestos plant in Agua Prieta was built in 1969 by American Asbestos Textile (AMATEK) of Norristown, Pennsylvania. They looked at the plant in March 1977. In the words of Dr Johnson:

As Ms Yoakum and I

walked through parts of the plant with the manager, we observed workers who were not wearing respirators and noted asbestos dust on their clothing and in their hair. We also

observed asbestos waste clinging to the fence at one side of the plant and strewn across the road. A sample from the roadside, where children walk to and from school, contained at least 20 per cent Chrysotile (white) asbestos.

The company president, John Rainey, was asked

246

why the conditions were so

dirty. He replied: 'It should be clean. We put our most modern equipment down there.' An article describing the filthy conditions made

front page news in the Arizona DailyStar on 27

March 1977. This story was

reprinted in Spanish in a

local Agua Prieta news-

paper and caused quite a stir. When the factory workers learned of the dangers they called for an

investigation There have been some 'cosmetic' changes: the factory exter- ior is now cleaned once a

week; workers must wear uniforms to cover their street clothes and leave them at the plant, and the workers are to get X-rays. But asbestos can still be

found around the plant, yet the pressure had died down. The union — known for its alliance with management — has told workers they will lose their

jobs if the complaints continue. Mexico now earns more from foreign factories than from tourism (in 1975 425 as against 480 million dollars), and these plants don't have to pay taxes. Labour is plentiful — unemployment in Agua Prieta is 22 per cent — and

cheap. The bottom daily wage is about £2 and

social security money is

taken out in exchange for free medical care. Because the jobless have

flooded to the cities the towns are in a terrible state: water and housing shortages; rising crime; lack of health care facilities and not enough money to put in needed sewer

lines or paved streets.

But, as the mayor of Agua Prieta, Luis Pericles Drabos, said; 'This town has a lot of future. You can't stop progress'. (Arizona Daily Star 30 May 1977)

left: The asbestos factory in Agua Prieta, Mexico. Asbestos dust is all around — covering the fence like snow. (Arizona Daily Star)

247

Kids play around the Mexican asbestos factory. If they suffer severe lung disease of cancer in 20 or so years time will anyone remember this exposure? (Arizona Daily Star)

A worker at the Mexican asbestos factory. No protection. The fence and everything is covered with killer asbestos dust. As are, no doubt, the inside of his lungs. (Arizona Daily Star)

248

There is no reason to suppose this account is not typical of most asbestos factories in all developing countries. Clearly workers in safer asbestos factories in the so-called developed world cannot

compete. Recently3 there have been several calls for international standards. The agency suggested to oversee these 'international standards' is the International Labour Organisation (ILO). The ILO was set up fifty-eight years ago with the aim of protecting workers against the perils of industry. It is the only League of Nations body to have survived the fascist with- drawal of forty years ago. It has produced some useful information on working conditions (hours, pay, safety and so on). Its committees are formed from the three sides of industry: management, government and unions. One drawback is the fact that the US has re-

cently4 withdrawn its support, and this means the loss of 20 millions out of a 50-million dollar annual budget. The US claims that the ILO is dominated by Communists and Third-world countries who are hostile to it.

However, let us assume that an international agency such as the ILO or United Nations recommended a ban on asbestos or tighter international standards: what good would it do? Who would enforce this? We have seen throughout this booklet the toothless nature of the British industrial policemen (factory inspectors) and they are no better, often worse, elsewhere.

We have also seen that the most effective action has been where organised workers — whether at work or home — have acted. These actions have not been limited to Britain. Workers all over the world are beginning to take action over the health hazards of asbestos.

Workers of the World Unite! You have your health to win!

3 a 'The need to establish world standards for the proces-

sing of asbestos', The Times, 20 January 1975. b 'International Confederation of Free Trade Unions',

Working Environment (Swedish), July -August 1977.

4 Guardian, 2 and 3 November 1977.

Steve Wodka, industrial health specialist, of the US Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union (OCA W) has done a lot on asbestos and other industrial diseases. (OCA W)

Some examples of world-wide action over asbestos hazards America Since the sixties there has been plenty of publicity in the US over the health hazards of asbestos. This has happened despite the well docu- mented5 attempts of the US asbestos industry to cover up the asbestos killings. There can be no doubt that much of this awareness is due to Professor S elikoff's excellent researches showing the real extent of asbestos-related diseases in the US, and also his readiness to work with the US trade unions. Added to this there have been many press reports, of which Paul Brodeur's6 are outstanding, on the hazards of asbestos. These have enabled working Americans to realise the hazards. Other reports7 of the horror stories and the lawsuits have added fuel to this justified fear. As a result of this the American trade unions have shown some concern over the hazards of asbestos. We have seen (p.23 7) how the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union are acting. The insulation workers union has for many years funded work with Professor Selikoff's laboratory in New York. We have also seen (p.14.6) how the Mare Island shipyard workers have negotiated medical rights and improved procedure. In June 1976 workers from some of

5 David Koteichuck, 'Asbestos research — winning the battle but losing the war', Health PACBulletin, No.61, November-December 1974;

b Bill Richards, 'New data on asbestos indicates cover-up of effects on workers', Washington Post, November 1978. 6 Expendable Amei.icans Paul Brodeur, Viking Press, 1974. 7 a 'An asbestos horror story', Labor Pulse, March and April 1976;

b 'An industrial watergate', Labor Pulse, September 1976.

249

25(1

Johns-Manville plants walked off the job to demonstrate over the health hazards of asbestos (Johns-Manville is the giant of the asbestos industry in the US). They stood around a coffin in memory of twelve workers who had died at one plant in the previous fourteen months. They wanted a medical clause to protect workers from getting cancer. Many other trade unionists supported them.

1O/ANY F[L1OJ

DEAD' 1w

Demonstration outside the US' largest asbestos company —Johns Manville —

in 1976. For better conditions and compensation the workers walked off the job and used a coffin to illustrate their point about dead mates. (New York Times)

Australia (including conditions won)

Although there were no government regulations in Australia concerning the safe use of asbestos until 1971, and then only in one state, Queens- land, by the 1970s many groups of Australian workers were taking direct action over asbestos hazards. A series8 of radio programmes in July 1977 and January 1978 summarised the position so far and in fact led to more actions by Australian workers. At the moment9 actions over asbestos are taking place at: Victorian Railways: as with British carriages (see p.157) there is a lot of asbestos to be stripped. Conditions and lack of action by management seem very similar. Asbestos is banned. Despite wheeler-dealing by experts the workers are demanding better working methods.

Garden Island naval dockyards: there have been struggles over asbestos for many years. Being well organised with a good shop committee they have won good conditions. Asbestos is banned for all new work; full face mask with power respirator must be used and all fibrous insulation (mainly glass fibre, ceramic fibre and Calcium Silicate) treated as asbestos. Power stations: the Federated Engine Drivers and Firemens Association (FED & FA) are leading the fight against the NS\V Electricity Commission. They are arguing for:

1 Asbestos to be banned for all new work and safer substitutes to be used. 2 The same protection for asbestos substitutes as for asbestos work. 3 Special non-cotton overalls to be supplied and laundered at company expense. 4 All insulation and other work involving the removal of asbestos or substitutes (and application of) to be done after normal hours so as to prevent other workers being exposed.

8 Man Peacock, 'Asbestos-work as a health hazard', ABC 145 -153 Elizabeth Street, Sydney. NSW. 1978. 9 Letter to BSSRS from Ben Bartlett, Workers' Health Centre, Lidcomhe, NSW, 23 February 1978.

251

252

5 Special changing facilities, separate from ordinary arrangements, to be provided along with showers, etc. 6 Special air-fed respirators to be provided with their own fresh air supiy, rather than

tapping into the general air station supply which may be contaminated with oil

mist, carbon monoxide, etc.

Chullora railway workshop: there is a survey of

past and present usage of asbestos by the union combined shop committee. Work with glass fibre banned at one stage because of cancer hazard.

Barylgil asbestos mine: situated in northwest NSW this mine, which opened in 1943, has em-

ployed almost solely black labour from the surrounding Aboriginal community. For most of its life this mine was owned by the biggest Australian asbestos outfit, James Flardie. The mine tailings are all around — used to fill in the sides of roads, surface school playground and so on. As recently as 1972 a government survey showed asbestos levels 140 times the present British government unsafe level of 2 fibres per ml of air. The miners come home from work smothered in dust. Neil Walker, an Aborigine who has worked at the mine 20 years, remarked:

We were told by the manager it [asbestos dust] wouldn't affect us. I said, 'Why, if it affects people overseas, why can't it affect us?' He said, 'I don't think so'. I said, 'Why not, because we're only Aboriginal people?' The only white men at the mine were the manager and the fitter.

There is a very high incidence of lung disease and heart trouble in the community. There are

very few old men in Barylulgil. Pauline Gordon, wife of Ken, a worker at the mine, commented:

Making themselves rich while our husbands are all chopping their life spans short now and they're all rich with money in their pocket through our husbands killing themselves digging that asbestos out of the ground. It should be closed up, in my opinion. They're too greedy for money... \Ve live here... It mightn't mean anything

to anybody else but we're a part of this... This is our home here.

The workers belong to the Australian Workers Union (AWU) but it has done nothing for them. Woodsreef Asbestos mine at Barraba, NSW: this mine has only been in operation for the last 5-6 years. Although owned by a profitable Quebec asbestos mining interest in Canada the mine is threatened with closure (jobs versus health?). The workers are drawn from a local farming community which has suffered from rural recession. Many of the workers think asbestos dust is no different from wheat dust. This changed when ABC broadcast a radio pro- gramme7 on the hazards. The miners held a stop-work meeting about the health hazards in August 1977. It was a very lively meeting and out of it came the following demandslo: That the company employ a full-time safety officer responsible to the workers; That the union (Amalgamated Metal Workers and Shipwrights Union, AMWSU) prepare an educational film on asbestos hazards; That we continue to campaign for a 'dust free' canteen.

253

Miners at a meeting in Barraba demand greater safety in handling asbestos. (Tribune Australia)

10 Amalgainoted News, September 1977.

That knowledge on asbestos hazards be spread widely, including substitutes, and joint meetings with other unions be explored; That the state government do air sampling around the mine and ingestion tests on cattle grazing in the area; That the unions concerned lobby the Minister for mines to enforce safety procedures; That the types of mask being issued at Woodreef be checked as to their efficiency; The meeting re-affirmed there was no intention to force closure of mine and mill, but to press for the highest possible health standards.

\. IiI

Canada Outside of Russia the world's largest producer of asbestos is Canada. Eighty per cent of Canada's asbestos mines are located in the province of Quebec. Trade union organisations came late to this province and it took a famous asbestos strike of the 1940s to win basic collective bar-

gaining rights. Slowly the union took an interest in health and safety and the Thetford miners went on strike in 1975 for higher pay and the right to stop work if the asbestos levels went above the so-called safe level. The strike went on for seven months and the union had to agree to drop the health and safety demand and agree to an enquiry (the Beaudry Commission).

Unemployment is higher in Quebec than any other part of Canada, particularly in the asbestos company towns (one is even called Asbestos), such as the Thetford mines, where alternative employment is virtually non-existent. The interim report of the Beaudry Commission has confirmed the miners' fears,1 1

Working conditions in the asbestos industry, as much in the mines and mills as in the processing plants, are not equipped with adequate means of keeping dust within levels safe to health. It is obvious after our study that technical means to ensure healthy working environment do exist and are readily available.

254

11 Ashtsios', Report No51 Science Council of c'anada.

1977.

Canadian Asbestos Plant Closed Down for Health Reasons: The United Asbestos Com- pany's 33 million dollar plant in Ontario was closed in April 1976 because of consistently high asbestos levels in the air. The plant was fairly new, although apparently it included a considerable amount of old equipment. In September 1975 Canadian factory inspectors found the plant was in a bad state. The report went to management but not to workers. The union, the United Steelworkers, pushed for improvements. Nothing was done, and on 8 April 1976 the workers staged a 'health walk out'. Due to the publicity the Canadian government intervened and on 12 April closed the plant down. A list of eight-pages of improvements and technological changes was to be met before re- starting the plant. There has been a government threat to close another plant in Ontario unless conditions improved. This can be done because asbestos figures little in the economy of Ontario, unlike Quebec, where there are even considerations of national- ising the asbestos mines. But either way the workers suffer: your life or your jobs. 20th century highway robbery!

Alberta insulation workers fight asbestos: Nine of the 25O-strong union of Southern Alberta insulation workers are already suffering from asbestosis. One of them is only thirty-six. The rest wait. But while they wait to see if its their turn they are putting S40 a month into a health and safety project fund. The union branch, local 126 of the Insulation and Asbestos Workers Union, has appointed Ray Sentes as research director, himself an asbestosis victim. Ray Sentes is very critical of the actions of companies and government and wants asbestos banned, safer substitutes used and threatened strike action to get employers to write in health and safety clauses into contracts.i2

12 David Aston, 'Asbestos — a killer that could be controlled', Calgary Herald, 6 August 1977.

255

256

France We have already covered the fights in France

against the hazards of asbestos factories (p.244) and asbestos on the Paris Metro (p.183). The

general struggles and actions of other French workers against asbestos have been collected in an extensive book13 that covers these struggles.

Greek workers fight asbestos hazards Greece is a country where European industries forced to clean-up their plants are moving too in a big way. But there are signs that the Greek workers are not taking it lying down. For instance in September 1978 workers at Patras, a blues asbestos plant in Greece, held a 48-hour strike. In the words of the Athens News it was 'A warning strike to protest against the un-

healthy working conditions'. But in the last

days of September the workers came out again and stayed out until mid-January 1979 — 120

days. They were forced back by lack of support by their union and economic pressure. The

employers offered a 22 per cent increase in

wages ('Dirt Money') but only for those working directly on production. All workers are exposed to a greater or lesser degree. They did not win their demands and have gone back to work but it appears they are not fooled by the attraction of 'dirt money'.

Holland In January 1977 some building workers in Utrecht

approached sympathetic students at the local

university for information on the hazards of asbestos. Together they produced some leaf-

lets on the health hazards and held a meeting after distributing them around the building sites. A bulletin was produced and the main demand raised, 'Ban asbestos on building sites'.

A Joint union-management committee for the

building trades was approached with this demand. This committee ('Ondernemings Raad') had not done anything up to that date. After some dis-

cussions with management it was agreed that

13 Danger! amiante. collectif intersyndical scurir des

universites —jussieu CFDT, CGT. FEN, Francois Maspero, 1977.

management would inform every worker by means of a leaflet of the hazards of asbestos and that they did not have to work with asbestos- containing materials. Another demand concerned the fact that building specifications should be drawn up jointly with workers' representatives, architects and management as leaving it until later is no use: if the building workers only see it when it is on site it is often too late to change.14

Russia and China Russia, as the major producer of asbestos in the world, and China as a significant producer, might be expected to show some example as to the protection of workers. In fact little is known about what goes on in these countries over health hazards as over most other issues. \Ve do know!5 that Russian asbestos miners have their fare share of asbestos-related diseases. China seems to have plenty of enthusiasm for asbestos as judged by a recent snippet in the Peking Review which quoted an 'economical' use of asbestos waste: stuffing pillows with it! Whilst they both have their problems, the care a country takes over the health of its people is one measure of its socialism. Banned Swedish asbestos machinery goes to China Sixty workers inside the Swedish firm of 'Euroc' in Koping, which makes asbestos boards, are still working near machines that are contaminated with asbestos and have been banned from use since 1975. The TU shop steward in the factory, Torbjorn Wassell, says the firm is using the new asbestos regulations as an excuse for running down production and 200 workers at the factory are threatened with redundancy. Of 197 workers medically examined, 47 had some form of lung damage and 3 had asbestosis. Wassell says there have been at least 10 deaths from cancer among ex-workers.

14 Letter to BSSRS from Leo Puyker, Chemiewinkel, 14 December 1978. 15 a 'Biological Effects of Asbestos', IARC, 1972, p.155; b Russian Journal of Hygiene and Sanitation, vol 37, 1972, p.29.

257

Source: LO Tidningen, 1978, the Swedish TUC newspaper

'EUROC' banned machine with TU rep, Torbjorn Wassell, showing deadly asbestos still present. (Conny Sillen)

258

The union has pushed the case through the Swedish Labour Court and the firm is to clean-

up the plant, pay for medical screening and continuous monitoring of the levels of asbestos.

They are also to move the banned asbestos plant. However, the union is very worried about tne firm's plans for the machines. Similar machines from a firm in a neighbouring town 'Hedemora' are apparently going to the Peoples' Republic of China. Their own firm, 'Euroc', have sold similar

machinery to Poland and Bulgaria. The TU reps have heard that workers in these countries are unaware of the health hazards of asoestos and their actions. After these machines were banned in 1975 the company tried to sell them to a Danish firm. The Swedish TU reps contacted the workers in the Danish firm and the order fell

through. Through their union, the Metalworkers

Union, and the Swedish TUC the TU reps are

pushing for an international programme against asbestos. This example shows it is clearly needed — not least in those countries that claim to be socialist.

There will no doubt be an increasing amount of international action over the health hazards of asbestos. There needs to be international ex-

change and cooperation between working people of all countries over this issue. Multinational companies have been doing just this for many years. Trade unions lag behind. Rank and file workers and community groups need to contact each other: there is little of this at the moment.

Asbestos is the symptom, the disease is...

But asbestos is only one of many hazards facing workers all over the world: cancer and other dangers from new chemicals, many dusts, radiation, noise, vibration, shift work and the sheer stress and boredom of many jobs themselves. The list is endless. And people all over the world are being played off against one another —

'complain too much and we'll move our company elsewhere' —

say the bosses. And as long as it remains their company they will continue to say so. Asbestos is the symptom of a sick society, not the disease. The real disease is a society that does not put the health of its people before all else. The World Health Organisation has defined health as 'A state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, not merely the absence of disease and infirmity.' Clearly only people themselves can decide when this definition is fulfilled. That means society must be controlled from the bottom up. People throughout the world have more in common with each other than they have with the companies, unions and governments that claim to represent them. We will not fully begin to eradicate the health hazards of asbestos until we have a true world-wide socialist society — a society that puts health before profit. To modify some words written a few years ago: WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE! YOU HAVE YOUR HEALTH TO WIN!

260

Appendix 1: Help to fight asbestos hazards

There are various organisationS and individuals that can

be of help in fighting the health hazards of asbestos.

BSSRS Work Hazards Groups: The Work

Hazards Groups consist of scientists and other trade unionists who believe that healthy working and living

conditions can only be obtained by people becoming

organised. Together the groups produce a national

Hazards Bulletin and various booklets (on the hazards

of Noise, Oil and Vibration so far) and leaflets (Asbestos,

Asbestos on the Tube, Glass Fibre, Shift Work, Hospital Hazards and Safety Reps. so far). Each local group can

offer advice, help (possibly asbestos identification) and

speakers, etc. Most of the groups have had experience in

producing local leaflets on hazards (e.g. asbestos). Below

is a list of current (December 1978) groups, more may be added and they can be contacted through the London

address.

Brighton Ian Wright, 68 Compton Road, Brighton, Sussex.

Birmingham Saltley Action Centre, 2 Alum Rock Road, Birmingham (021-328 4184). M erseyside Mary Crimmons, 70 Granville Road, Liverpool 15

(05 1-733 6925). London Alan Dalton, London Work Hazards Group, BSSRS, 9 Poland Street, London W1V 3DG (01-43 7 2728). Manchester Bud Hudspith, 4 iontrose Avenue, West Didsbury, Manchester M20 8LN (06 1-445 1096). NE Hazards Group 13 Railway Street, Langley Park, Durham

(0385-731889).

Sheffield Dave Hayes, 14 Goodwin Road, Sheffield 8 (0724-57337/583856).

Hospital Hazards Group Gene Feder, BSSRS, 9 Poland Street, London W1V 3DG (01-43 7 2728). Women and Work Hazards Group Marianne Craig, BSSRS, 9 Poland Street, London W1V 3DG (01-437 2728).

Local Trade Union Health and Safety Groups These groups were set up to meet the need of working people for organised self-help groups over health and safety issues. They work closely with the BSSRS Work Hazards Groups. Many of them publish their own local l-lazards Bulletins', hold advice centres, workshops on specific hazards, have lists of sympathetic experts, reference books, etc. Although specifically for trade unionists and work issues many are sympathetic and active in local community hazards too. Below is a list of current (December 1978) local groups: for new additions/change of address consult the latest issue of the BSSRS Hazards Bulletin.

Bedford— BASH Bedford Association for Safety and Health, David Lewis, 146 Spring Road, Kempston, Bedford (0234-66755). Birmingham— BR USH Birmingham Regional Union Safety and Health Campaign, Eric Shakespeare/J.B. Lolly, 160 Corisande Road, Selly Oak, Birmingham 29. Bristol— BASH Bristol Action on Safety and Health, John Halliday, 6 Keynes Road, Clevedon, Bristol. Cannock— CHASE Cannock Health and Safety Experiment, Betty Dugmore, 56 Grange Crescent, Penkridge, Staffs. Coventry— CHASM Coventry Health and Safety Movement, Tony Hitchins, 229 Bredon Avenue, Binley, Coventry (0203-45663 5). Don caster— HASSA RD John Dickenson, 29 High Street, Arksy, Doncaster DN5 OSF. Dunfermline— DASH Dunfermline Area Safety and Health Group, Mike Morris, Clackmannon House, Clackmannon.

261

262

Leeds— LASH Leeds Action on Safety and Health, P.H. Thorpe, 29 Blenheim Terrace, Leeds 2 (0532-39633). London North North London Health and Safety Group, do Camden

Community Law Centre, 146 Kentish Town Road,

London NW1 (0 1-485 6672). London South—SLASH South London Action on Safety and Health, do 506 Brixton Road, London SW9 (01-723 4245). London South-EaSt_HASSEL Health and Safety in South East London, Doug McEwan, 6 Sedgebrook Road, London SE3. London West—MASH Middlesex Action on Safety and Health, c/c Hihingdon Community Law Centre, 63 Station Road, Hayes, Middlesex (01-5 73 4021). Manchester— MASC Manchester Area Safety Committee, Bud Hudspith, 4 Montrose Avenue, West Didsbury, Manchester M20 BLN (061-445 1096). Merseyside Hazards Group—MHG Merseyside Hazards Group, Mary Crimmons, 70 Granville Road, Liverpool 15(051-733 6925). Rotherham WEA WEA Health and Safety Information Service, Chantry

Buildings, Corporation Street, Rotherham (0709-72121).

Sheffield— TUSC Sheffield Trade Union Safety Committee, Seb Schmoller.

312 Albert Road, Sheffield 8 (0742-584559) Southampton— WHAC Work Hazards Advisory Committee, Graham Peterson,

27 Pointout Road, Bassett, Southampton. Telford— THSG Telford Health and Safety Group, Mike Watts, 67 High

Street, Dawley, Telford (0952-501 484).

Nancy Tait

Nancy Tait is the secretary of a new organisation, SPAID — the Society for the Prevention of Asbestosis And Industrial Diseases. It is a registered charity and aims, among other areas, to fight the hazards of asbestos. A meeting held on 10 March 1979 attracted 30 or so people of whom many were trade unionists. She has also published a booklet Asbestos Kills and has given advice and help to many groups over asbestos problems. She can be contacted at: 38 Drapers Road, Enfield, Middlesex (01-366 1640).

Asbestos Action This is a 'completely independent and voluntary' group of individuals who came together as a result of the Hebden Bridge massacre. They have been most active in the area of compensation. Apart from giving evidence to the Government's Advisory Committee on Asbestos in 1977 and one or two press meetings they appear to have done little. This has led some critics to re-name them 'Asbestos Inaction'. They can be contacted via: Max Madden MP, House of Commons, London SW1.

Newspapers The Guardian, Morning Star, Socialist Worker and New Scientist have all given extensive coverage of the health hazards of asbestos over the past few years. They may be worth contacting if press coverage is needed for your struggle. In addition the Socialist Workers Party has produced several pamphlets on the hazards of asbestos and has helped organised workers and community groups fight the asbestos hazard, It has also helped with the fight for compensation. They can be contacted at: P0 Box 82, London E2 9DS.

263

Appendix 2: Further reading on asbestos hazards

The frightening growth of asbestos-related disease in

working people is only matched by the growth of medical literature reporting on these deaths. Most of these

papers are of no use to people wishing to fight the hazards of asbestos or its substitutes. Below is a

selected list of useful publications. Rank and file trade unionists or community groups can obtain a copy of most publications mentioned in this booklet at 5p per page plust post from: 'Asbestos', Work Hazards Group, BSSRS, 9 Poland STreet, London W1V 3DG. This service is not available to companies, libraries, students

writing theses etc. as they can get them with a bit of effort.

These are the two basic and

most useful documents. They are fully referenced to earlier

work.

The European Economic Communities (EEC) appear to have produced two statements or documents on asbestos. They differ and there is evidence that the asbestos industry has

influenced' one.

264

Asbestos — health hazards

Asbestos, International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organisation, vol 14 1977. Available from Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Revised Recommended Asbestos Standard, National Institute for Occupational Health and Safety, US Depart- ment of Health Education and Welfare, 1976. Available for sale from: Superintendent of Documents, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC20402, USA.

Public Health Risks of Exposure to Asbestos, Pergamon Press, 1977. This is a very confusing document that does not offer any practical solutions and backs off

from a ban on asbestos.

On health hazards of asbestos, John Evans, European Parliament, Working Document 344/77, 9 November

1977. A much better statement of the hazards and

requirements for a ban on asbestos.

The US trade union, the Oil. Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union (OCAW) have produced an excellent slide show plus tape and wall poster.

During 1979 the GMWU are producing a pamphlet on the hazards of asbestos for their safety reps. Available from: Dave Gee, Health and Safety Officer, GMWU, Thorne House, Ruxley Ridge, Claygate, Esher, Surrey KT1O OTL (78-62081).

Asbestos — its hazards and how to fight them costs about £1, £70 and £8 each. Available from: Anthony Mazzocchj, Vice President, OCAW, P0 Box 2812, 1636 Champa Street, Denver, Colorado, 80201, USA. In addition to the above the evidence to the Advisory Committee on Asbestos 1976-77 is worth a read. Several textbooks on the health hazards of asbestos are due out in 1979 and may be useful.

Engineering Aspects of Dust Control, G.S. Rayhans and G.M. Bragg, John Wiley, 1978. This is an academic pot-boiler of little use to either TU safety reps or experts faced with asbestos problems.

Asbestos vol 1, Properties, applications and hazards, ed. L. Michacis and S.S. Chissick, Wiley, 1979. A middle of the road book that claims to represent neither the asbestos industry or its critics. Despite this, by asserting 'Asbestos.., without which our current western way of life could not continue as such', it does indirectly support the 'safe' use of asbestos. However it is readable and, especially the chapters on prevention, provide some useful sources and references. In addition safe working procedures for stripping (chapter 8) asbestos are given. Also included are some useful chapters on the available substitutes for asbestos.

It is in this area where there is a real lack of good useful guidance. We hope thjsbookletwill go part of the way to fulfilling that need. In addition the following publications may be useful.

Asbestos — fighting the risk

BSSRS has produced a series of low-priced leaflets (about 5p each) on Asbestos, Asbestos on the Tube and Glass Fibre. They are available from: Work Hazards Group, BSSRS, 9 Poland Street, London W1V 3DG.

'Aestos — health precautions in industry', HMSO 1976, 25p.

265

The Factory Inspectorate (Health and Safety Executive) have produced a lot of guidance notes and leaflets on the hazards of asbestos. As dis-

cussed in this booklet (p.64) they are, as you'd expect, middle of the road and provide only minimum standards.

Many well organised workplaces have got much better standards, but you should be aware of the official position.

The Asbestos Research Council

and Asbestos Information Com- mittee have produced a lot of blatant propaganda to push asbestos, but they have also

produced some useful work guides that could be applied both to asbestos and to its

substitutes. Bearing these

comments in mind, the following publications can be

obtained from The Asbestos

Research Council, P0 Box 40,

Rochdale, Lancs (0706-474221.

266

Technical Data Notes (TDN) these are gradually being

replaced by Guidance Notes (below) at 3Op each, but for the moment they are available free from your local

Inspector of Factories. TDN 13 'Standards for Asbestos Dust Concentration

for Use with the Asbestos Regulations 1969' TDN 24 'Asbestos Regulations 1969: Respiratory

Protective Equipment' TDN 35 'Control of Asbestos Dust' TDN 42 'Probable Asbestos Dust Concentrations at

Construction Processes' TDN 52 'Health Hazards from Sprayed Asbestos

Coatings in Buildings'

Guidance Notes (GN) these are replacing TDNs and are

available from HMSO at 30p each. There are two, so far on asbestos: GN EH 10 'Asbestos: Hygiene Standards and Measure-

ment of Airborne Dust Concentrations', December 1976

GN MS 13 'Asbestos', March 1978

Publications of the A dvisory Committee on Asbestos

a 'Asbestos — health hazards and precautions', HMSO

1977, lOp b 'Selected Written Evidence Submitted to the Advisory Committee on Asbestos', HMSO 1977, £5

c 'Asbestos — Work on Thermal and Acoustic Insula-

tion and Sprayed Coatings', HMSO 1978, 5Op d 'Asbestos — Measurement and Monitoring of Asbestos in the Air', HMSO 1978, £1

Other reports are expected in 1979.

Codes of Practice 'For Handling Consignments of Asbestos Fibre in British Ports' 'For Handling and Disposal of Asbestos Waste Materials' Technical Notes No.1 'The Measurement of Airborne Dust by the Membrane Filter Method' Control and Safety Guides 1 'Protective Equipment in the Asbestos Industry

(Respiratory and Protective Equipment and Protective Clothing)'

2 'The Application of Sprayed Asbestos Coatings' 3 'Stripping and Fitting of Asbestos-containing

Thermal Insulation' 4 'Asbestos Textile Products, CAF/Asbestos beater

Jointings and Asbestos Miliboard' 5 'Asbestos-based Materials for the Shipbuilding and

Building and I'Iectrical and Inginccring Insulation'

6 'Handling, Storage, Transportation and Discharging of Asbestos Fibre into Manufacturing Processes' 7 'Control of Dust by Exhaust Ventilation' 8 'Asbestos-based Friction Materials and Asbestos

Reinforced Resinous Moulded Materials' 9 'The Cleaning of Premises and Plant in Accordance

with the Asbestos Regulations'

Asbestos Substitutes

Asbestos-Characteristics, Applications and Alternatives, Fulmer Research Institute, Stoke Poges, Slough SL2 4QD (395 2181), 1976, £5 Asbestos Substitutes, British Steel Corporation, Industrial Hygiene Department, 1977 A Recommended Standard for Occupational Exposure to Fibrous Glass, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, US Department of Health Education and Welfare, April 1977. Available from: Superintendent of Documents, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, USA.

Compensation The following four books may be useful. Do not forget to consult your TU legal department, Community Law Centre or solicitor. The Hazards of Work Pat Kinnersly Pluto Press 1973 How to Get Industrial Injury Benefits J. Bell, Sweet and Maxwell 1966 Rights at Work Jeremy McMullen Pluto Press 1978 Industrial Injuries Benefits, Peter Smith, Oyez Publishing Ltd, 1978.

267

Appendix 3: Asbestos substitutes

Names and addresses of makers of asbestos substitutes (see table on p.110)

268

1 New Ventures Group, ICI Ltd. Mond Division. The Heath, Runcorn. Cheshire

2 Morganite Ceramic Fibres Ltd. Norton, Wirral, Merseyside Tel. 051-336 5171

3 Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd. West Auckland Road, Darlington Tel. 0325-53881

4 Newalls Insulation Co Ltd. Washington Tyne & Wear. NE38 8LJ. Tel. 0632-461111

5 The Carborundum Co Ltd. Mill Lane. Rairtford. St Helens, Merseyside WA1 1 8LP, Tel. 074-488 2941

6 McKechnie Ceramic Fibres Ltd. P.O. Box 3, Widnes, Cheshire W48 OPG, Tel. 051-424 2611

7 Fibreplass Ltd. Insulation Division, St Helens, Merseyside WA1O3TR. Tel. 0744-24022

8 H.J. Knights and Co Ltd. United House, North Road. London N7 9PB. Tel. 01-607 5861

9 British Gypsum Ltd. Ferguson House, 15 Marylebone Road, London NW1 5JE, Tel: 01-486 1282

10 William Kenyon and Sons Ltd. Chapel Field Works, Dukinfield, Cheshire SK16 4PT Tel. 061-330 5651

11 Moler Products Ltd. Hythe Works, Colchester, Essex C02 8JU Tel. 0206-73191

12 Electro-Refractaire (UK> Ltd. 8th Floor Eversham House, Clarendon Road. Watford, Herts, Tel. 923-42345

13 Potters Insulation (Sales) Ltd. Tameside Mills, Park Road, Dukinfield, Cheshire SK16 5LS, Tel, 061-3301411

14 Lafarge Aluminous Cement Co Ltd. 730 London Road, Grays, Essex, Tel. 040-26 3333

15 R.B, Hilton, Norman Road, Greenwich, London SE 10, Tel. 01-858 4851

16 Mandoval Ltd. Index House, St Georges Lane, Ascot, Berks SL5 7EU, Tel. 0900-25011

17 G.R. Stein Ref ractories Ltd. Genefax House, Taptoru Park

Road, Sheffield SlO 3FJ, Tel: 0742-306577

18 Morgiass Ltd, Sherborne, Dorset, Tel. 09351-3722

19 Scandura Ltd. P.O. Box 18. Cleckheaton, West Yorkshire BD19 3UJ, Tel. 0274-875711

20 T.B.A. Industrial Products Ltd. Textiles Division. P.O. Box 40. Rochdale 0L12 7E0, Tel, 0706-47422

21 Interseals Ltd, Sufrere House, 85 Manor Road, Wallington, Surrey SM6 ODH, Tel. 01-647 1903

22 Forthergill and Harvey Ltd. Summit, Lit-tleborough, Lancs OL1 5 90P, Tel. 0706-7883 1

23 Simpkin Machir, and Co Ltd. Manor House, Eckington, Sheffield S30 9BH, Tel. 024-6832324

24 Liquid Plastics Ltd. P.O. Bock No.7, London Road, Preston PR1 4AJ, Tel. 0772-59781

25 Pilkington Brothers Ltd. Prescot Road, St Helens, Merseyside. Lancs

27 Multifabs Ltd. Osmaston Works, Derby DE3 8LF

28 B.B.A. Automotive Ltd, & Mintex Ltd. P.O. Box 18, Clackheaton Yorkshire

29 Don International Ltd. Hendam Vale, Manchester M9 1SX

30 Trist Draper Ltd. 804A Bath Road, Brislington, Bristol BS4 5LH

31 Tilling Construction Services Ltd, Wapseys Wood, Oxford Road, Gerrards Cross, Bucks SL9 5TF

26 T.A.C. Construction Materials Ltd. P.O. Box 22, Trafford Park, Manchester Ml 7 1 RV

269

Taking a sample of suspect asbestos lagging for analysis. Note the use of face mask for even such a small sample. (Shirley Institute)

270

Appendix 4: The identification and analysis of asbestos

F One of the big problems still faced by people taking action over asbestos (or its fibrous substitutes) is: how do you know what the stuff is? Or if you are told that there's a 'safe' amount in the air, how do you get this checked?

Of course you should be able to get any suspect substance checked under section six of the 1974 Health and Safety at Work Act. Under this section manufacturers and suppliers of substances for use at work have a legal duty to tell of the hazards and precautions to be taken. But this is a very general requirement and the type and

quality of information varies a lot from company to company. In some cases the factory inspector or environmental health officer (the old 'public health inspector') may analyse the suspect substance, but this may mean a delay of many weeks. Often you will want to get your management to sample and in such a case they can use one of the organisations listed below.

A word of warning. All these organisations do most of their consulting for management. This can affect the results. Where possible it is advisable to get a sympathetic scientist to be present when sampling is done (contact groups listed in Appendix 1, p.260). Also some unions

may have developed their own reliable contacts and all unions have the services of the TUC Centenary Institute of Occupational Health, Keppel Street, Gower Street, London WCI (01-636 8636) available to them.

A

There are basically three types of asbestos aaaiysis service that might be needed:

A Straight identification of whether the substance is asbestos, what type, whether it is another suspect fibre (glass fibre, ceramic fibre, calcium sulphate, calcium silicate and so on) or what. This type of analysis on a single sample costs around £20. Reduced rates usually apply for more than one sample.

B Air sampling of some of the asbestos in the air according to the currently accepted Factory Inspectorate method. As explained elsewhere (p.127) this method only measures a fraction of the asbestos in the air because the light microscope cannot detect the smaller, but equally harmful, asbestos fibres. This type of analysis is around £100 per day plus expenses.

C Air sampling of all the asbestos in the air. This method uses a combination of X-ray diffraction and the electron microscope. Estimates in 1977 gave the method as costing about £435 per sample. This method does give the total amount of asbestos in the air and is indispensable for environmental sampling where method B will pick up nothing because it is too crude. Greater use of this method will bring the costs down (most universi- ties have many of these types of instrument that could be put to some good use) and what price a life? The residents in Cork won the right to this type of analysis around an asbestos dump and factory. This is the best form of air analysis.

271

Organ/se tions undertaking asbestos analysis for industry on a repayment basis

key to type of analysis

A identification of fibre only B standard (inaccurate) analysis of asbestos in the air C complete analysis of asbestos in air (essential for

environmental levels)

Organ/sat/on Contact

A, B 1 Air Sample Counts Analysis Mr Clark 2 Hereford Way 061-338 5645 Stalybridge, Cheshire

A, B 2 Air Sample Counts Analysis Mr Clark 7A London Road 0784-61302 Staines, Middlesex

A 3 Albright and Wilson Mr Greenfield Analytical Services 021-552 3333 P0 Box 80 Oldbury Warley, West Midlands

A, B 4 A.H. Allen and Partners Mr Dunn Public Analysts Laboratory 0742-21687 67 Surrey Street Sheffield Si 2LH

A 5 Analytical Laboratory Mr Mars 7 Offham Road 079-16 4534 Lewes, Sussex BN7 2QR

Source: Asbestos measurement and monitoring of asbestos in air, 2nd Report of the Advisory Committee on Asbestos, June 1978. 271

Org

anis

atio

ns u

nder

taki

ng a

sbes

tos

anal

ysis

for i

ndus

try

on a

repa

ymen

t bas

is

key

to ty

pe o

f ana

lysi

s

A

iden

tific

atio

n of

fibr

e on

ly

B

stan

dard

(in

accu

rate

) ana

lysi

s of

asb

esto

s in

the

air

C

com

plet

e an

alys

is o

f as

best

os in

air

(ess

entia

l for

en

viro

nmen

tal l

evel

s)

Org

an/s

at/o

n C

onta

ct

A, B

6

Ana

lytic

al a

nd C

onsu

lting

C

hem

ists

M

etal

lurg

ists

and

Eng

inee

rs

The

Lab

orat

orie

s F

ortu

ne L

ane

Els

tree

, H

ertfo

rdsh

ire

WD

6 3H

0

7 A

tek

(Pol

lutio

n C

ontr

ol)

Ltd

Bar

clay

s B

ank

Cha

mbe

rs

Hic

k La

ne

Bat

ley

Wes

t Yor

kshi

re W

F1 7

550

A, B

& C

8

Ato

mic

Res

earc

h E

stab

lishm

ent

Env

ironm

ent a

nd M

edic

al

Ser

vice

s D

ivis

ion

Har

wel

l, O

xfor

dsh

ire

A, B

9

Bal

ne's

Env

ironm

enta

l C

onsu

ltant

s Ltd

140 B

olto

n S

tree

t R

amsb

otto

m

Lancashire B

LO 9.JA

A,

B

18

Che

mic

al D

efen

ce

& C

E

stab

lishm

ent

Por

ton

Dow

n S

alis

bury

, W

iltsh

ire SP

4 O

JO

A

19

City

of

Birm

ingh

am C

ounc

il

Eng

inee

r's D

epar

tmen

t I n

dust

rial

Res

earc

h La

bora

torie

s B

rass

hous

e P

assa

ge

Bro

ad S

tree

t

Birm

ingh

am B

i 2H

R

A

20

City

of

Birm

ingh

am C

ounc

il nv

ironm

enta

l D

epar

tmen

t 12

0 E

dmun

d S

tree

t B

irmin

gham

83

2EZ

A,

B

21

City

Lab

orat

orie

s 12

6 M

ount

Ple

asan

t

Live

rpoo

l L3

5S

R

A

22

City

of

Lond

on P

olyt

echn

ic

Dep

artm

ent

of M

etal

lurg

y &

M

ater

ials

Whi

tech

apel

Hig

h S

tree

t Lo

ndon

El

A, B

23

C

omm

erci

al a

nd F

oren

sic

Labo

rato

ries

220

Elg

ar R

oad

Rea

ding

RG

2 O

DG

A, B

24

C

ount

y of

Avo

n S

cien

tific

S

ervi

ces

Cou

nty

Labo

rato

ry

Can

ynge

Hal

l W

hatle

y R

oad

Bris

tol B

S8

2PR

Mr

Cre

asey

09

80-6

1021

1

Dr

Bak

er

021-

643

6987

Mr

Arc

her

021-

353

9944

Mr

Kid

man

05

1-70

9 39

32

Dr

GiU

am

01-2

83 1

030

Mr

Mos

s 07

34-8

2428

Mr

Tay

lor

0272

-312

371

A,B

Mr K

imbe

r 01

-953

130

6

Mr

Tay

lor

24-4

71 27

2

Mr

E.T

. S

mith

02

35-2

4141

Mr

Dol

limor

e 07

0-68

2 21

56

A

10

Bat

h U

nive

rsity

M

r F

orse

y A

25

C

ount

y Offi

ces

Mr M

arkl

and

Sou

th W

est

Indu

stria

l 02

25-6

941

Res

earc

h U

nit

Mat

lock

, D

erby

shire

DE

4 3A

G

0629

-341

1

Cla

vert

on D

own

A, B

31

H

.J.

Eva

ns a

nd P

artn

ers

Mr J

enki

ns

Bat

h, S

omer

set

Pub

lic A

naly

st's

Lab

orat

ory

0267

-753

6

A

11

Birk

beck

Col

lege

D

r B

arne

s D

ank

Lane

Dep

artm

ent o

f Cry

stal

logr

aphy

01

-580

662

2 C

arm

arth

en, S

outh

Wal

es

Mal

et S

tree

t, Lo

ndon

WC

1 A

32

E

xete

r U

nive

rsity

M

r She

ldon

A,

B

12

Bos

tock

Hill

and

Rig

by

Mr C

ogga

n P

hysi

cs D

epar

tmen

t 03

92-7

7911

35-3

9 B

lrchf

ield

Roa

d 02

1 -3

59 5

951

Que

ens

Driv

e

Birm

ingh

am B

19 is

u E

xete

r

A,

B

13

Brit

ish

Bel

ting

& A

sbes

tos

Mr H

unt

A, B

33

F

ulm

er R

esea

rch

Inst

itute

Ltd

M

r Pye

Gro

up L

td

0274

-875

711

Sto

ke P

oges

01

-395

218

1

Indu

stria

l H

ealth

Uni

t S

loug

h

P0

Box

18

BuC

kiflg

ham

shire

SL2

4QD

Cle

ckhe

aton

, Yor

kshi

re

A, B

26

C

ount

y Ana

lytic

al L

abor

ator

y M

r Kee

n

A,

B

14

Brit

ish

Cer

amic

Res

earc

h M

r Blo

or

152

Gre

at C

harle

s S

tree

t 02

1-23

3 23

85

& C

O

rgan

isat

ion

0782

-454

31

Birm

ingh

am B

3 3H

T

Que

ens

Roa

d S

toke

-on-

Tre

nt, S

taffo

rdsh

ire

A, B

27

D

iam

ond

Sci

entif

ic L

td

Mr D

iam

ond

Low

Roa

d 03

25-7

6547

A,

B

15

Brit

ish

Rai

l Res

earc

h M

r Hen

ley

Gai

nfor

d

& c

D

epar

tmen

t 03

32-4

9203

C

ount

y Dur

ham

Eng

inee

ring

Div

isio

n A

, B

28

D

unlo

p S

emte

x Lt

d M

r Nye

D

erby

B

rynm

awr

0495

-310

000

A,

B

16

Cap

e A

sbes

tos

Ltd

Mr G

, Sm

ith

Gw

ent

NP

3 4X

N

Fib

re R

esea

rch

Labo

rato

ry

89-3

7111

Iv

er L

ane

A

29

Elm

Lab

orat

orie

s M

r Sea

l

Cow

ley

Sha

p 09

3-16

254

Uxb

rldge

, M

iddl

esex

UB

8 2J

Q

penr

ith,

Cum

bria

A

17

Cen

tral

Ele

ctric

ity

Mr C

lare

A

, B

30

E

nviro

nmen

tal

Ana

lysi

s Lt

d D

r Jon

es

Gen

erat

ing

Boa

rd

0602

-830

591

Com

mer

cial

Roa

d 05

1 -3

34 2

643

Sci

entif

ic S

ervi

ces

Dep

artm

ent

Bro

tulb

oroh

lgh

Rat

cliff

e-on

-Soa

r W

irral

, C

hesh

ire

Not

tingh

am N

G11

O

EE

Org

anis

atio

ns u

nder

taki

ng a

sbes

tos

anal

ysis

for i

ndus

try

A

46

I nve

resk

R

esea

rch

Mr

Byr

ne

on a

repa

ymen

t bas

is

Inte

rnat

iona

l 03

1-66

5 68

81

Edi

nbur

gh E

H21

7U

B

key

to ty

pe o

f ana

lysi

s A

47

K

ings

ton

Pol

ytec

hnic

Sch

ool

Dr M

asel

y A

id

entif

icat

ion of

fibr

e on

ly

of C

hem

istr

y 01

-549

136

6 B

st

anda

rd (

inac

cura

te) a

naly

sis

of a

sbes

tos

in th

e ai

r K

ings

ton

on T

ham

es,

Sur

rey

C

com

plet

e an

alys

is o

f asb

esto

s in

air

(ess

entia

l fo

r A

48

La

bora

tory

of t

he C

ity A

naly

st

Mr H

ollid

ay

enci

ronm

enta

l le

vels

) 2

Cra

nsto

n S

tree

t 03

1 -5

56 2

302

Edi

nbur

gh E

H8

8BE

O

r'ani

sario

n C

onta

ct

A,

B

49

John

Lai

ng R

esea

rch

&

Mr T

heob

old

A,

B

34

Gla

sgow

Uni

vers

ity

Dr

Fry

er

Dev

elop

men

t Ltd

01

-953

614

4 &

C

Che

mis

try

Dep

artm

ent

041-

339

8855

M

anor

Way

G

lasg

ow G

12 8

00

Bor

eham

Woo

d H

erts

WD

6 1 LN

A

35

J.

Hag

gle

Pat

ters

on a

nd

Mr

Gru

in

A

50

Levi

ngto

n R

esea

rch

Sta

tion

Dr

Ben

nett

Ass

ocia

tes

0783

-842

724

Phi

lade

lphi

a La

ne

Dep

artm

ent o

f Che

mis

try

0473

-769

11

Hou

ghto

n-le

-Spr

ing

Levi

ngto

n S

unde

rland

lp

swic

h, S

uffo

lk IP

1O O

LU

Tyn

e an

d W

ear D

H4

4ES

A

, B

51

Lo

ndon

Sch

ool o

f Hyg

iene

and

M

r Kni

ght

A,

B

36

J. H

aggl

e P

atte

rson

and

M

r Pat

eman

T

ropi

cal M

edic

ine

01 -6

36 8

636

Ass

ocia

tes

021-

778

1271

K

eppe

l Str

eet

Cen

tral

Lab

orat

ory

Lond

on W

C1E

7H

T

loW

ilers

ley R

oad

A

52

Loug

hbor

ough

Con

sulta

nts

Ltd

Mr C

oles

M

osel

ey

Uni

vers

ity o

f Tec

hnol

ogy

0509

-304

26

Birm

ingh

am 8

13 O

AT

Lo

ughb

orou

gh, L

eice

ster

shire

A

, B

37

Heh

ner a

nd C

ox L

td

Dr G

rant

A

, B

53

F.A

. Ly

ne,

Pub

lic A

naly

st

Mr

Lyne

T

he L

abor

ator

ies

01-4

88 3

538

220-

222

Elg

ar R

oad

0734

-824

28

107

Fen

chur

ch S

tree

t R

eadi

ng,

Ber

ks R

G2

OD

G

Lond

on E

C3M

5JB

A

, B

54

M

cCro

ne R

esea

rch

Mr E

dwar

ds

A,

B

38

W.H

. Her

dsm

an L

td

Mr

Ric

e A

ssoc

iate

s Lt

d 01

-435

228

2 38

Wils

on P

lace

03

552-

2548

8 2

McC

rone

Mew

s N

erst

on

Bel

size

Lan

e E

ast

Kilb

ride

Lond

on N

W3

Gla

sgow

074

4QD

A

39

Her

tis B

urea

u of

Res

earc

h an

d C

onsu

ltanc

y T

he H

atfie

ld P

olyt

echn

ic

P0

Box

110

C

olle

ge La

ne

Hat

field

, N

ets

AL1

O9A

D

A, B

40

H

umbe

rsid

e C

ount

y C

ounc

il

Cou

nty

Labo

rato

ries

184

Hig

h S

tree

t K

ings

ton

upon

Hul

l HU

1 1N

E

A

41

Impe

rial M

etal

Ind

ustr

ies

Ltd

Res

earc

h S

ervi

ce

Dep

artm

ent

P0

Box

216

K

ynoc

h W

orks

W

itton

B

irmin

gham

B6

7BA

A, B

42

In

dust

rial

Pet

rolo

gy

Res

earc

h U

nit

Que

en M

ary

Col

lege

D

epar

tmen

t of

Geo

logy

M

ile E

nd R

oad

Lond

on E

l 4N

S

A, B

43

In

dust

rial

Pol

lutio

n A

bate

men

t Lt

d 21

Inn

er P

ark

Roa

d Lo

ndon

SW

19 6

ED

44

Inst

itute

of O

ccup

atio

nal

Med

icin

e R

oxbu

rgh

Pla

ce

Edi

nbur

gh

A, B

45

In

tern

atio

nal

Res

earc

h an

d D

evel

opm

ent C

ompa

ny L

td

Ros

sway

New

cast

le-u

pOfl-

Tyn

e NE

6 2Y

D

Mr F

ulw

ell

3068

100

Mr H

unte

r 04

82-2

7847

Mr E

vans

02

1 -3

56 4

848

Dr P

oole

01

-980

4811

Mr G

ough

01

-789

084

1

Dr

Bec

kett

031-

667

5131

Dr G

ale

0632

-650

451

A,

B

55

Mid

Gla

mor

gan

Cou

nty

Pub

lic H

ealth

Lab

orat

ory

Inst

itute

of P

reve

ntat

ive

Med

icin

e T

he P

arad

e C

ardi

ff C

F2

3UJ

A,

B

56

Min

ton,

Tre

harn

e an

d M

r Mul

lins

Dav

ies

Ltd

0222

-241

58

Mer

ton

Hou

se

But

e C

resc

ent

Car

diff

CF

1 6N

8 A

5]

M

utor

and

Hac

kman

P

ublic

Ana

lyst

s 32

5 K

enni

ngto

n R

oad

Lond

on S

Ell

4QE

A,

B

58

The

Nat

iona

l Occ

upat

iona

l H

ygie

ne S

ervi

ce

Ltd

12 B

rook

Roa

d F

allo

wfie

ld

Man

ches

ter M

14 6

UH

59

Nor

th E

ast L

ondo

n P

olyt

echn

ic,

Fac

ulty

of S

cien

ce

Dep

artm

ent o

f Che

mis

try

Rom

ford

Roa

d Lo

ndon

E15

4LZ

A,

B

60

Nor

th o

f Eng

land

Indu

stria

l H

ealth

Ser

vice

20

Cla

rem

ont P

lace

New

cast

le-u

pon-

Tyn

e N

E2

4AA

The

Reg

iona

l Lab

orat

ory

Cou

nty

Hal

l D

urha

m D

H1

5UA

Mr R

ixon

02

22-2

8033

A, B

&

C

A,

B

&c

Mr F

orbe

s 01

-735

140

6

Mr K

ing

061-

2249

191

Mr B

alla

h 01

-534

591

5

Mr F

orst

er

0632

-285

11

Mr S

hent

on

0385

-644

11

A, B

61

T

he N

orth

Eas

t R

egio

nal

Ana

lytic

al S

ervi

ce

A

76

Sci

entif

ic a

nd T

echn

ical

M

r Per

ry

Org

anis

atio

ns u

nder

taki

ng a

sbes

tos

anal

ysis

for i

ndus

t,y

The

Law

n 08

9422

-321

0 on

a re

paym

ent

basi

s R

yton

. T

yne

and

Wea

r

key

to ty

pe o

f ana

lysi

s N

E4O

30N

A

iden

tific

atio

n of

fibr

e on

ly

A,

B

77

Shi

rley I

nstit

ute

Mr C

owhi

g

B

stan

dard

(ina

ccur

ate)

ana

lysi

s of

asbe

stos

in

the

air

& C

D

idsb

ury

061-

445

8141

C

com

plet

e an

alys

is o

f asb

esto

s in

air

(ess

entia

l fo

r M

anch

este

r M

20 8

RX

enci

ronm

enta

l le

vels

) A

78

S

omer

set C

ount

y C

ounc

il M

r Cas

sidy

C

ount

y Lab

orat

ory

0823

-345

1 O

rgan

isat

ion

Con

tt C

ount

y H

all

Tau

nton

,

A, B

62

P

enda

r T

echn

ical

Ass

ocia

tes

Ltd

Mr T

app

A, B

79

S

outh

Eas

tern

Lab

orat

ory

Ltd

Mr M

cDon

ald

20-2

2 S

t M

ary

Str

eet

0278

-572

83

1 N

ew D

over

Roa

d 02

27-6

5459

Brid

gew

ater

, Som

erse

t T

A7

3LY

C

ante

rbur

y C

T1

3AD

A,

B

63

Ple

ssey

Com

pany

Ltd

M

r Lee

A

80

S

outh

ampt

on U

nive

rsity

M

r Hea

th

& C

C

hem

ical

M

etal

lurg

ical

01

-478

304

0 D

epar

tmen

t of M

echa

nica

l 07

03-5

5912

2

Labo

rato

ry

Eng

inee

ring

Vic

arag

e La

ne

Sou

tham

pton

S09

5N

H

llfor

d, E

ssex

A

81

T

atlo

ck a

nd T

hom

pson

M

r Mal

colm

A, B

64

P

ublic

Ana

lyst

& S

cien

tific

M

r Sym

onds

1 56

-160

Bat

h S

tree

t 04

1-33

2049

1

Adv

iser

's D

epar

tmen

t 07

03 5

5582

6 G

lasg

ow G

2 4S

X

29 C

obde

n R

oad

A,

B

82

TB

A I

ndus

tria

l Pro

duct

s Lt

d M

r Syk

es

Sou

tham

pton

S02

4F

U

P0

Box

40

0706

-474

22

A,

8 65

P

ublic

Ana

lyst

& S

cien

tific

M

r P

erry

R

ochd

ale,

Lan

cash

ire

Adv

iser

's D

epar

tmen

t 07

05-2

9501

A

, B

83

Tec

hnic

al a

nd A

naly

tical

M

r Whi

tehe

ad

Hyd

e P

ark

Roa

d S

tock

ton-

on-T

ees

0642

-561

144

Sou

thse

a, H

ants

P05

4LL

C

leve

land

TS

18 2

ND

A

66

Pub

lic A

naly

st's

Lab

orat

ory

Mr

Hut

chin

son

A, B

84

T

rent

Pol

ytec

hnic

D

r Bra

ithw

ajte

10

Dea

n Str

eet

0632

-248

06

& D

N

ottin

gham

NG

1 4B

U

0602

-482

48

New

cast

le-u

pon-

Tyn

e N

E1

1PG

A

85

T

urne

r an

d N

ewal

l Lt

d M

r Mon

kman

A

, B

67

Qua

lites

t E

ngin

eerin

g M

r Hill

A

sbes

tos F

ibre

Lab

orat

ory

061-

872

2181

S

ervi

ces

Ltd

0344

7-41

31

do T

AC

Con

stru

ctio

n

Win

kfie

ld

Mat

eria

ls L

td

P0

Box

22

Win

dsor

, Ber

kshi

re

Tra

fford

Par

k M

anch

este

r M

17 1

RU

A, B

68

Q

ualit

y C

onsu

ltant

s 07

0-68

3 63

69

1 2a

Lor

d S

tree

t B

acuP

, La

ncas

hire

0L13

8HE

A

, B

69

R

eed

Eng

inee

ring

and

Dev

elop

men

t Ser

vice

s Ltd

E

and

D C

entr

e A

yles

ford

M

aids

tone

, K

ent

ME

2O 7

PP

A

70

R

egio

nal C

hem

ist a

nd

Pub

lic A

naly

st's

Dep

artm

ent

8 E

lliot

Pla

ce

Cly

dew

ay

Gla

sgow

G3

8ET

A

, B

71

R

isk

Man

agem

ent

Con

sulta

nts

Ltd

26 F

ench

urch

Str

eet

Lond

on E

C3M

3D

R

A,

B

72

Rob

ert G

ordo

ns

Inst

itute

of T

echn

olog

y S

choo

l of C

hem

istr

y S

t And

rew

s S

tree

t A

berd

een

AB

1 1H

G

A

73

Roo

ney

and

War

d Lt

d B

lack

wat

er S

tatio

n E

stat

e C

ambe

rley,

Sur

rey

A

74

Rud

dock

and

She

rrat

t pu

blic

Ana

lyst

's L

abor

ator

y U

nit 5

. Nor

thga

te W

orks

N

ewrv

Par

k C

hest

er C

H2

2AR

A

, B

75

Sal

ford

Uni

vers

ity

Dep

artm

ent o

f Che

mis

try

Sal

ford

M5

4WT

Bris

tol

BS

8 1 T

E

A, B

87

U

nive

rsity

of S

trat

hcly

de

Dep

artm

ent of

Env

iwnm

enta

l E

ngin

eerin

g Ja

mes

Wei

r Bui

ldin

g 75

Mon

tros

e S

tree

t G

lasg

owG

l 1X

J

A, 8

88

U

nive

rsity

Col

lege

of S

w-n

sea

Dep

artm

ent o

f Geo

logy

S

ingl

eton

Par

k S

wan

sea

SA

2 8P

P

A, B

89

W

ater

fall

and

O'B

rien

The

Lab

orat

ory

2 O

okfie

!d R

oad

Bris

tol 8

A

, B

90

Wes

t M

idla

nds

Indu

stria

l H

ealth

Ser

vice

Ltd

83

Birm

ingh

am R

oad

Wes

t B

rom

wic

h W

est M

idla

nds

B70

6P

X

A, B

91

W

olfs

on B

ioan

alyt

ical

Cen

tre

Uni

vers

ity o

f Sur

rey

Sta

g H

ill

Gui

ldfo

rd, S

urre

y G

U2

5XH

A

, B

92

Wol

fson

Ins

titut

e of

O

ccup

atio

nal H

ealth

U

nive

rsity

of D

unde

e E

nviro

nmen

tal

Hea

lth S

ervi

ce

Med

ical

Sch

ool

Nin

ewel

ls

Dun

dee

A, B

93

T

he W

olfs

on In

stitu

te o

f &

C

Inte

rfac

ial

Tec

hnol

ogy

Uni

vers

ity o

f Not

tingh

am

Not

tingh

am N

G7

2RD

Pro

fess

or A

lex

W.K

. S

tew

art

04 1

-522

440

ex

t 253

4

Dr B

arne

s 07

92-2

5678

Mr H

owes

02

7 2-3

7731

Dr M

cVic

ker

021-

553

7116

Dr H

arris

on

0483

-712

81

Mr G

uthr

ie

0382

-644

625

Dr N

ehru

06

02-5

6101

A,

B

&C

86

U

nive

rsity

of B

risto

l 21

Woo

dlan

d R

oad

Mr P

earc

e

0272

-24

16 1

Mr B

rails

ford

06

22-7

7711

Mr N

icho

lson

04

1 -2

21 6

323

Mr M

eldr

um

01-2

83 4

611

Mr F

raze

r 02

24-5

7451

1

Mr

Roo

ney

0276

-311

60

Mr C

onch

ie

0244

-215

05

Mr D

ollim

ore

06 1-

736

5843

"4

-4

Appendix 5: Asbestos survey from TU group - (HASSEL)

The following questionnaire is one that the TU group Health and Safety in South East London (HASSEL) used to conduct a survey of asbestos use in their area. It was based on the 1969 Asbestos Regulations. Other ones

could easily be drawn up based on newer regulations, asbestos use, negotiated agreements, and so on.

HASSEL Asbestos in your workplace Health and Safety a survey in S.E. London

All forms of asbestos (blue and white) cause lung scarring

(asbestosis) and cancer. There is no cure for these diseases, and

they lead to long-drawn-out and painful deaths. There is no

known safe level that will prevent you having a chance of getting

these diseases if you work with or near asbestos. Mesothelioma

— a cancer of the lining of the lungs or stomach — is almost

always caused by asbestos exposure and has occurred in relatives

of asbestos workers, and people living near asbestos factories.

The present government 'safe' level for white asbestos is 2 fibres

per cc. Recent research has shown that this may allow 1 in 10

workers to contract asbestos-related diseases.

HASSEL (Health and Safety in South East London) is a Trade

Union based organisation and we want to carry out a survey of

asbestos in the workplace. The purpose of the survey is to find Out what measures are being taken against the asbestos hazard.

When the survey has been completed a report will be published

with the aim of giving as much information as possible on how

to protect workers from the hazards of asbestos dust.

HASSEL now has an Advice Centre which is open every Tuesday

evening, 7.00-9.00. The address is Woolwich Adult Education

Institute, la Burrage Road, Woolwich.

If you want: a To know if a material contains asbestos;

b Advice on other dust problems at work;

c Advice Ofl any other health and safety at work problem;

Contact HASSEL or come to the Advice Centre.

278

If you have any suggestions for future surveys, please include them in the Further Remarks section at the end. Please fill in this survey as fully as you can. If possible get your workmates to help you. Further copies of the survey are available. If the answer to a question is yes or no, cross out the one that doesn't apply. If you can't give a straight answer to a question, you can explain in detail in the Further Remarks section at the end. If you have ever had discussions or a dispute with your employer, or you have called in the Factory Inspector about asbestos problems, please give full details of what happened in the Further Remarks section, including Factory Inspector's reports, standard procedures, bargained for, and so on. After the first few questions (1-6) the survey is in two parts. The first part is about asbestos in your workplace. e.g. in the structure of the building, but not being worked on. The second part is about asbestos directly involved in your work.

survey Name:

Trade Union officer held:

Workplace/Factory:

Is asbestos present in any form at your workplace/facto,.y? (Asbestos products are used for lagging around pipes and boilers, insulation, fireproof ing, roofing, protective clothing. brake and clutch linings, and many other applications, Under Section 2(2) (ci of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 employers have to provide information '.. . necessary to ensure so far as is reasonably practicable, the health and safety at work of his employees'. Therefore employe have a duty to give workers details about the presence of asbestos.) YES/NO

2 Does your employer have an up-to-date register of all asbestos or asbestos products in your workplace? YES/NO

3 Give details of the process(es) or application(s) where the asbestos is present.

4 Is the asbestos marked with an asbestos label or sticker? YES/NO

279

280

5 Has a measurement of the asbestos dust concentration in the

air ever been carried out? It so, what method was used and

what was the result?

YES/NO

6 Does your employer intend to remove the asbestos and

substitute another material? If so. give details.

YES/NO

it asbestos is only present in the structure of the building you

work in, e.g. as an insulating material. just answer questions 7

and 8. If asbestos is directly involved in your work, answer

questions 9 to 20. If asbestos is being worked on in more than

one way, please complete more than one survey sheet.

asbestos in the building

7 Is the asbestos frayed or likely to be disturbed?

YES/NO

8 What precautions would your employer take if it was decided

to remove or strip out asbestos?

asbestos in your work

9 How is your workplace cleaned?

10 Is the cleaning done so that asbestos dust doesn't escape or

isn't discharged into the air of your workplace?

YES/NO

11 Is loose asbestos. i.e. not in a closed container, left lying

around your workplace?

YES/NO

12 Does your employer keep an up-to-date register of workers

exposed to asbestos?

YES/NO

13 Do asbestos workers have regular medical examinations? It so. how often? YES/NO

14 a Are medical records kept? b Do Safety Reps have access to them? YES/No

15 Does your employer provide the following things? If so. please tick and then answer questions in each section.

Exhaust Ventilation

Breathing Equipment

Protective Clothing

Exhaust Ventilation 16 How often is the equipment inspected?

Breathing Equipment 17 What kind of respirator is it?

18 How often are the respirators inspected?

Protective Clothing 19 How often is the clothing cleaned?

20 a Is the clothing cleaned outside the factory? YES/No b If so, is it packed in sealed containers and marked 'Asbestos contaminated clothing'? YES/No

further remarks

281

Index

Aborigines, 252 Schools, 204 Levels in workplace, 127 Advisory Committee on Asbestos Surrey docks, 148 Measuring, 123 Origin and function, 73 UCATT resolution, 82 Measuring,accuracy and Age expectancy of lung cancer Victorian Railways, 251 methods, 124 victims, 27 Asbestos cancer Recording of levels, 58 Agua Prieta, 246 See Mesotheijoma Removal, 119 Air pollution, 181 Asbestos cement TUC maximum allowable Urban, 151 Safer than other asbestos concentration, 126 Amberex H.T. (asbestos free), products? 45 Warning signs, 60 111 Sheets and pipes use dust See also Dust... American Asbestos Textile levels, 127 Asbestos exposure (AMATEK), 246 Substitutes, 110 Boilermakers, 39 Amey, Tom, 37 Asbestos companies in UK, 8,57 British rail engineering, 37 Asbestos Asbestos death avoidability, 8 Electricians, 37 Amount produced, 17 Asbestos diseases Fitters, 39 Analysis, address list of Barrow-in-Fumes5 shipyards, Friends and relations of organisations, 271 144 asbestos workers, 29 Associated rocks and minerals, Compensation see Compen- Gas mask factories, 32 19 sation Gastrointestinal cancers, 34 Censorship of play against, 12 Delay in appearance of Husband asbestos worker, 28 Composition and properties, symptoms, 20 Overalls, 28, 33 15 Diagnosis, 42 Period necessary for Effect on health, 20 Dockyards, 142 Mesothelioma, 28 Fire protection, 52 Incidence among motor Racial discrimination in Health hazards, 264 mechanics, 150 standards, 63 House of Commons building, Incidence in child labour in Thermal insulators, 33 49 South African mines, 63 Vehicle builders, 37 Identification and analysis, Incidence of death, 21 See also Asbestos dust 270 . Lagging, 98 Asbestos fires, 54 Ignorance by authorities of Motor mechanics, 150 Asbestos hazards danger, 1 3 Prevention see Preventive Exportation, 244 Sealing and stripping, 160 measures Survey questionnajre, 278 Types, 19 Symptoms, 20 Asbestos imports Uses, 19 Turner Brothers, 94 Quantity of different ports, 149 Water pollution, 191 X-ray of chest, 42 Asbestos in the house, 193 Working with, 141 See also Asbestos exposure Asbestos industry World output, 240 Asbestos dumping, 215 Advertise asbestos as safe, 11, Asbestos action, 263 France, 244 44,48, 60 Asbestos ban Asbestos dumps Average pay and directors Building Sites, 256 Cork appeal against, 88 pay, 243 Dockers, 91 Planning conditions, 224 Number employed. Firemen, 54 Asbestos dust 57 ILO and UN recommenda Air, 180 Profits, 241 tion, 248 Domestic appliances, 193 US export hazards to the Juniper Street, Stepney, Extraction equipment, fixed Third World, 245 GLC building site. 101 localised, 132 Value, 57

283

Asbestos insulation board dust levels, 127

Asbestos insulation workers Smoking incidence of lung cancer, 26

Asbestos mines Conditions in, South Africa, 62

Asbestos penetration of protective clothing, 178

Asbestos processing Preventive equipment and clothing, 66 Requirement for exhaust ventilation, 66

Asbestos products Labelling proposed by TUC, 81 Registration proposed by TUC, 81

Asbestos regulations Fines cheaper than cost of complaints, 71 Inadequate according to TUC, 81 Prison sentences for offences, 73 Prosecutions and fines, 68 Summary, 66

Asbestos roofs, 44 Asbestos spraying, 127 Asbestos stripping wetting

agent, 165 Asbestos substitutes, 102

Companies producing, 107 Fire prevention and protection, 55 Hazards, 107 Insufficient research, 109 List, 107 Non-fibrous safer, 109 Non-respirable sized fibres, 110 Preventive measures, 114 Publications on, 266 Research into hazards of, TUC proposal, 80 Suppliers address list, 268 TUC proposal, 80 Types, uses, makers, 110 Working with. 141

Asbestos waste disposal, 215 Asbestesis, 21

Asbestos exposure at Hebden Bridge, 10 Boiler covering, 24 Compensation, 233 Degree of exposure. 22 Delay in appearance of symptoms, 219 Fire eaters, 24 In dogs. 25 Incidence, 23 Incidence, UCATT survey. 82 Incorrect diagnosis, 24 Lung cancer combined, 25

284

Period of exposure, 219 Symptoms, 22 X-ray of chest, 11

ASLEF, 159 AUEW

C.A. Parsons, 141 Cardiff Royal Infirmary fitters strike, 199 Isle of Grain strike, 114

Australia, 251

Baker Street underground, 185 Ban on asbestos

See Asbestos ban Barbican building workers'

strike, 96 Barking, 219 Barrow-in-Furness shipyards, 144 Barylgil asbestos mine, 252 Bath workers, 196 BBA

Average pay and directors' pay, 243 Profits, 241 Major UK asbestos firm, 58

Belvedere Power Station, 178 Bibliography, 264 Blankets, 111 Blood tests, 43 Blue asbestos

Production and importation, 49 Regulation, 66

Brake and clutch linings Causing Mesothelioma, 28 Servicing, 150

Brakes,lSI, 193, 213 Brazil, 245 British Belting Asbestos See BBA British Leyland

Blue asbestos penetrates protective clothing, 178 Prosecution, 69

British Occupational Hygiene Society, 121 British Rail

Glass fibre, 117 Incidence of asbestos diseases, 157

British Rail Engineering Asbestos victims, 37 Prosecution, 69

British Steel ('orporation, 72 Bronchitis

Glass fibre, 103 Non-fibrous asbestos substitutes. 109

Brown asbestos blankets, 1 28 BSSRS Work Hazards Groups

Address list, 260 Dartford asbestos dump, 221

Building workers Barbican, 96 Holland, 256

Cables' high temperative insulation, 112 Calcium silicate

Block cutting, 128 Hazards, 107 Use and supplier, 110

Calcium sulphate, 108 Canada, 254 Cancer

Absence of known asbestos threshold, 14 Asbestos exposure, 7, 121 Glass fibre, 104

Cancer of the Pancreas Wrongly attributed to death by Mesothelioma, 30

Cape Industries Average pay and directors' pay, 243 Bow asbestos dumps, 218 Hebden Bridge, 8 Major UK asbestos firm, 57 Profits, 241 Safety standards in South African mines, 63

Cape, Darlington and Newall, 113 Carbon fibre, 105 Car brake linings, see Brakes Cardiff Royal Infirmary, 199 Central Asbestos, 59 Central Electricity Generating Board, 113 Ceramic fibre blanket, Ill Ceramic fibre paper, 112 Ceramic fibres

Hazards and makers, 107 Use and suppliers. 110

Ceramic foam, 108 Chest pains, 103 China, 257 Chullora railway workshop. 252 CIBA-GEIGY (UK), 118 Cleaners, 206 ('loths, 11 2 Clutch and Brake linings See Brake and clutch linings Coating paint, 112 ('ommittee on the Environ- ment, Public Health and Consumer Protection of EEC. 76 ('ompanies producing asbestos substitutes, 107 ('ompensation

Asbestos diseases, 232 DHSS, relatives can't claim, 235 Lx gratis allowances, 235

Heating allowance, 235 Industrial death benefit, 235 Publications on, 266 Special diet allowance, 235 Specialist solicitor, 233 US, 237

Composition Asbestos substitutes, 111

Cork Pollution controls, struggle for, 212 Appeal against asbestos dump, 88, 222

Corrugated roof sheeting, 110 Council flats, Deptford, 210 Council house garages, 209 Crocidolite see Blue asbestos Cure rate

Mesothelioma, 27 Lung cancer, 27 Lung cancer and asbestosis combined, 27

Darlington Insulation Co Ltd Belvedere Power Station 2nd hand washing machine, 178 Prosecution, 69

Dartford asbestos dump, 220 Decadex fire check, 112 Demolition dust levels, 127 Demolition firms, 71 Deposition of Poisonous Waste Act 1972, 216 Dermatitis, 103 Devonport Dockyard, 143 DHSS, 233 Diagnosis

Asbestos diseases, 42 Asbestosis, x-ray, 11 Failure to identify asbestosis, 8

Dirt money. 256 Disc brake pads, 213 Discrimination

Susceptibility, 41 Racial, 63

Dockers, 91 Dockyards, 142 Doll, Professor Sir Richard, 93 Domestic appliances, 193 Drills, 133 Dust, invisible, photographing, 138 Dust level measuring, 123 Dust safety standard, 116 Dust you can't see, 102

EEC, 76 EEPTU, 145 Electric toasters, 193 Engineering. British Rail See British Rail Engineering

Ennals, David, 200 Envirocor Ltd, 227 Extraction equipment, fixed localised, 132 Extraction units, 137 Extractors for brake linings, 156

Factory Inspectorate Delay in recognition of asbestos as carcinogenic, 25 Powerlessness, 11

Factory Inspectors Attitudes, 77 Victims of Mesothelioma, 32

Ferodo, 244 Fibre glass pneumoconiosis, 103 Fibre reinforced boards, sheets, slabs and blocks, 110 Fibrefax

Bulk fibre, 110 Fibroid phthisis see Asbestosis Fibrosis, 108 Fire doors, 116 Fire eaters, 24 Fire prevention and protection

Alternatives to asbestos, 55 Fire protection

Asbestos, 52 Firemen, 54 Fleetdown Estate, 220 Floor sweeping, 195 Floor layers, 32 Fosterite, 157 France, 256 Furnace linings, 110

Galbestos, 53 Garage roof and wall panels, 193 Garden Island naval dockyard, 251 Gas cooker seals, 193 Gas mask factory, 32 Gastrointestinal cancers, 34 Gernj Pony brake washers, 156 Glass cloths, 112 Glass fibre

Asthma, 103 Bronchitis, 103 Cancer. 104 Dermatitis, 103 Hazards, 103

Glass fibres Isle of Grain strike, 113 Mesothelioma, 104 Portsmouth yacht building, 139 Preventive measures, 106, 117 Glass fibre-reinforced calcium

silicate insulating board, 129

Glass fibre dust Standard for concentration in air, 106

Glass fibre workers Precautions, 106

Glass wool, 110 GMWU

Actions over asbestos, 82 Darlington Insulation strike, 178 Intra-union disputes, 85 North East London Poly, 206 Gold mining, 128

Government, 64 Greece, 256 Guttering

Asbestos substitutes, 110 Gyproc, 110

Harrogate and Rippon hospitals, 199 Harwell, 202 HASSEL, 278 Hazards

Asbestos, 264 Asbestos substitutes, 107 Dust you can't see, 102 Glass fibre, 103 Turner and Newall export hazards to France, 244

Health checks Persons exposed to asbestos, 41

Heart failure Asbestos exposure at Hebden Bridge, 10

Hebden Bridge massacre Dr Robert Murray, 90 Turning point in health protection, 8

Holland, 256 Hoses' high temperature insulation, 112 Hospital fitters, 199 Hospitals, 198 House of Commons building, 49

IC' Saffil fibres, 108 Strike for protective equipment for asbestos stripping, 84

Identification and analysis of asbestos, 270 Imperialism, 243, 245 ILO, 248 Industrial diseases Trade Union census, 80 Insulation, sprayable, Ill Insulation and Asbestos Workers Union. 255

285

Insulation application, indirect exposure in engine-room, 128 Insulation engineers, 113 Insulation workers. 43 Insulation board (Vermiculite), International coordination, 258 International solidarity, 243 Irish Development Authority, 88 Iron rests, 193 Ironing pad, 193 Isle of Grain Power station strike. 113

Johns-Man yule, 250 Juniper Street, Stepney, GLC building site, 101

Kentish Town swimming baths, 196 Kleen air brake dust collector, 156 Klinger. Richard, 182

Lagging, 98 Laing, John, 96 Lake superior, 192 Lambeth asbestos dump, 227 Latex spray painting of asbestos, 160 Leicester General Hospital, 203 Lenesta tip, 226 Licensing of thermal insulation contractors, 81 Limpet spray, 111 Lung cancer. 25 Lung cancer

Age expectancy average compared with asbestos worker, 27 Asbestos exposure at Hebden Bridge, 10 Asbestosjs combined, 25 Asbestosis combined, cure rate, 27 Cure rate. 27 Incidence among asbestos workers, 25 Incidence among non-smoking asbestos workers, 26 Incidence among smoking asbestos insulation workers, 26 Symptoms, 27

Lung function tests, 42 Lung scarring, see Fibrosis

McDonald. Professor Corbett. 88 Maintenance fitters. 1 99

Mandoval Vermiculite, 107

Manor House Hospital, 201 Mare Island Naval Shipyard,

111 California, 146 Marglas glass fibre, 112 Marinite asbestos reinforced board, 129 Measuring asbestos dust level See Asbestos dust, measunng Mesothelioma, 27

Compensation, 233 Cure rate, 27 Delay between exposure and first symptoms, 28 Effect of smoking, 27 Floor layers, 32 Glass fibre, 104 Hospital fitters, 199 Incidence, 27 Incidence in UK, 30 Overalls with asbestos dust, 33 Proximity to asbestos factory, 28 Proximity to shipyard, 28 Railway carriage builders, 31 Shipyards, 31 Thermal insulators, 33 Tiles, 32 Triton Kaowool, 107 Under reporting, 29 White asbestos, 46 Zeolite, 105

Mexico, 295 Middlesex Hospital, 200 Motor mechanics, 150 Murray, Dr Robert, 90 Myth of safety of white asbestos. 48

NALGO, 117 Newhouse, Dr Muriel, 91 Nibblertine, 140 Nomex cloth, 112 Nomex fire blankets, 55 North East London Polytechnic, Holbrook annex, 206 North London Health and Safety Group, 196 Northampton General Hospital. 199 Nottingham City Hospital. 203 NUPE, 196 NUR, 159 NUT, 205

Trinity school. 205 Nylon dust, 108

Oven door seal, 193 Oven gloves, 193 Ovens, 213 Overalls, 33

Paints, dust suppressing and fire resistant, 112 Paints, fireproof and ceiling, 193 Parsons, CA., 141 Patras strike, 256 Perlite

Hazards and makers, 108 Uses and suppliers, 112

Pipes Asbestos substitutes, 110 Lagging, 193

Plaster, 108, 111 Pneumonia

Asbestos exposure at Hebden Bridge, 10 Glass fibre, 103

Pollution of air See Air pollution Pollution of soil See Soil pollution Pollution of water, 191 Portable hair dryers, 193 Power stations, 113 Preventive measure

Asbestos diseases, 147 British Navy Code of Practice, 144 Glass fibre, 117, 139 Government, 64 Monitoring, 58 Publications on, 265 Questionnaire/Check list, 81

Stripping methods. 164 Prison sentences for offending firms, 73 Profits of asbestos industry, 241 Prosecutions and fines, 68 Protective clothing, 176

Asbestos substitutes and their suppliers, 112 Isle of Grain strike, 113 Methods of cleaning. 178

Quartz, 195

Racal Amplivox airstream helmet, 176 Racial discrimination

Asbestos health standards, 63 Australian asbestos mines. 252

Railway carriage builders, 31 Rainham, 226 Raybestos Manhattan

Asbestos dump in Cork, 88 Asbestos factory in Cork. 212 Asbestos substitute for brakes. 157 Professor Doll's help. 95

Research Objectivity, 25, 48, 87. 106, 120, 183

286

Resin bonded glass fibre, 111 Respirators, 172 Ringaskiddy asbestos dump, 222 Rip saws, 133 Rocksil, 114 Rockwool, 117 Royal Navy Dockyard, 107 Russia, 257

Safety Representative victimised, 77 Safety standards

Turner and Newall's South African asbestos mines, 63

Saffil fibres Hazards and makers, 108 St James Park tube, 187

Scaffolders, 114 Schools, 204 Scotton Banks hospital, 199 Screening persons susceptible to asbestosis, 41 Sealing and stripping asbestos, 160 Seals, 111 Selikoff, Professor Irvin, 92, 249 Sheets and boards, 110 Shipyards

Incidence of Mesothelioma, 31 Proximity causing Mesothelj- oma, 28

Sidcup, Kent, 182 Simmering pads, 193 Skandinaviska Eternit A.B., 47 Smoking

Asbestos insulation workers, incidence of lung cancer, 26 Asbestos workers incidence of lung cancer, 26 Effect on Mesothelioma 27

Society for the Prevention of Asbestosis and Industrial Diseases, 263 Soil pollution, 191 Solicitor specialising in industrial injuries compensation 233 Sore throats, 103 South Africa, 63 Southampton docks, 149 SPAID, 263 Sputum cytology, 42 Standards for respirators, 174 Strengthening materials, Ill Suing for compensation. 233 Summerland disaster, 52 Supalux, 117 Surrey docks, 148 Swan Hunter's shipyard, 145 Symptoms

Asbestos diseases, 20 Asbestosis, 22 Lung cancer, 27 Synthetic wood pulp, 108

Tait, Nancy, 263 Talwan, 245 Talc, 195 Textiles, 112 TGWU

British Rall Engineering, register of members deaths and diseases, 37 Manor House Hospital, 201 Thermal Insulation, Glasgow, Investigation deaths and diseases of members, 34, 98 Turner and Newajls, 238

Theatre group sacked for play on asbestos, 12 Thermal insulation contractors, 81 Thermal insulation engineers, 85 Thermal insulation workers, 34 Thermal insulators, 33 Thetford asbestos mine, 254 Tiles, 32 Todd, John, 34 Toy cigarettes, 195 Trade Union Health and Safety Groups, local

Address list, 261 Trade Unions

No census incidence of industrial diseases, 80

Trinity School, East London, 205 Triton Kaowool

Hazards and makers, 107 TUC maximum allowable concentration of asbestos dust, 126 TUC on asbestos, 80 Turner and Newall

Average pay and directors' pay, 243 Compensation, 234 Compensation protest at AGM, 238 Ex gratia allowances, 235 Incidence of asbestosis research kept secret, 122 Major UK asbestos company, 8,57 Profits, 241 Safety standards in South African mines, 63 Transfer hazards to France, 244

Turner Brothers asbestos disease incidence, 94 Turners Asbestos Cement Co

Cartoon of conditions, 65

UCATf Barbican anti-asbestos building workers strike, 96 Portsmouth shop floor action over glass fibre extraction, 1 39 Questionnaire on asbestos, 81

Underground, London, 184 Underground, Paris, 183 Unemployment threat, 242 USSR, 257

Venezuela, 245 Vermiculite

Asbestos contamination, ioi Hazards and makers, 107

Victimisation of safety representative, 77 Victorian Railways, 251

Warning signs, 60 Water pollution, 191 Welding stress relief asbestos substitutes, lii Wetting agent for asbestos stripping, 165 White asbestos

Mesothelioma, 46 Myth of safety, 48

Woodsreef Asbestos mine, 253 Workplace asbestos dust levels, 127 Worker-student cooperation, 256 Woven fabrics asbestos substitutes, 112

X-ray of chest Asbestosis, 11 Diagnosis of asbestos diseases, 42

Yale University, 164 Yacht building

Glass fibre, 139

Zeollte Mesothelioma, 105

287

'Al :S1r%t

O 9502541 3 4

—H

Date post:	29-Jul-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	mckcon12
View:	413 times
Download:	5 times