Posts Tagged ‘occupational disease’

Bagpiper’s Fungus, Cheesewasher’s Lung & other obsolete occupational maladies

Friday, March 22nd, 2013

wool-srters
Did you ever hear of rose gardener’s disease, nun’s chastity of fiddler’s neck?
All apparent names for occupational maladies of yesteryear. Watch this fascinating short video clip charting 10 strange occupational hazards.
Some of these conditions are associated with professions that are confined to the dustbins of history – becoming a loblolly boy isn’t a career path for young boys anymore. And some of these conditions may still exist, they are likely just rebranded. Others may have just adapted to modern tastes – cheesemaker’s lung may be largely a hazard of the past, but unfortunately, Popcorn Lung is not.

Cavalcade of Risk, Rocky Mountain Style, and other news notes

Wednesday, July 28th, 2010

Check out the Rocky Mountain High Edition of Cavalcade of Risk. Louise of Colorado Health Insurance Insider produces a great compendium of recent “best of the web” risk posts on a variety of topics ranging from the ubiquitous health care debates to investing and long term insurance. It’s a great way to get a sampling of several blogs. Plus, Louise and Jay’s blog always offers a refreshing street-level view of issues related to health care. They offer a wise take on the big issues but also offer good advice on everyday health issues: If you ever get a rock stuck in your nose…”.
A good man wronged – Joe Paduda has been fighting the good fight for Sandy Blunt, former North Dakota state work comp fund CEO. Blunt had a recent setback when the Supreme Court affirmed his felony conviction, but more recently we learn that the prosecutor is under investigation for prosecutorial misconduct in the case. One of the charges against her is allegedly withholding exculpatory evidence from Blunt’s attorney. (If you aren’t familiar with the Blunt case, see Peter Rousmaniere’s article Blunting Political Vindictiveness or plug “Blunt” into Joe’s search feature and catch up.) We had the good fortune to meet Blunt at an industry symposium prior to all these events – he was on fire with his commitment to overhaul the ND agency, to inspire employees and employers alike, and to ensure the best possible care for injured workers. Innovative, energetic, creative – by all accounts, he was making a significant positive impact. Then came a series of surprising charges resulting in his ouster. As we’ve noted before, most of these charges were minor, trumped up administrative issues, such as spending a few hundred dollars on lunches and gift certificates to motivate staff – practices that were not uncommon in other state departments. Other more serious charges were dismissed or shown to be erroneous – and now we have potential prosecutorial misconduct being investigated.
ADA at 20 years – It’s been 20 years since the Americans with Disabilities Act was signed into law, a groundbreaking initiative which afforded unprecedented public access and workplace protections to the disabled. All those parking spots, wheelchair ramps, wider doorways, and sloped curbs? They didn’t exist a few decades ago. For a commemorative featuring recent news stories, commentary and employer resources, see HR Web Cafe: The ADA at 20 Years.
Calling Uncle Sam – Is the workers comp system broken for occupational diseases such as the ones that are likely to result from the BP oil spill cleanup? Peter Rousmaniere thinks so – the feds have had to bail the system out in two prior catastrophes within the past decade. He makes the case for federalizing occupational disease in his column at Risk and Insurance.
Walking the walk when it comes to obesity – Employees at Total Medical Solutions are taking their role as health care providers to heart and taking a leadership stance when it comes to doing something about obesity. In the last three months, 25 employees have shed a total of more than 400 pounds, and achieved good local press for their accomplishments. We were reminded of seeing this story when we read Roberto Cenicero’s post on the biggest loser, corporate edition, which talks about a competitive challenge several of Minnesota’s largest corporations have embarked on. His post also links to a recent study from Integrated Benefits Institute on “health and productivity management” practices at 450 U.S. companies.
Quick lesson in how to save $550,000 – Discouraging employees from filing a workers compensation claim for an on-the-job injury is a no-no. Just ask Rawley’s of California how they fared in a recent criminal investigation, which revealed that some managers were routinely telling injured employees to use their own insurance rather than report injuries to the state.
In the “what else is new” department… – Mark Hoffmann of Business Insurance reports on news from the most recent RIMS Benchmark Survey: The soft market is still going strong. “The survey, based on information provided by risk managers, found that workers compensation experienced the greatest decline in the second quarter, at 3.8%, while property and D&O dropped by 3.5%.”

Working Outdoors: Skin Cancer and Workers Comp

Thursday, May 21st, 2009

With the full heat of summer bearing down on us, the Insider has deputized its readership to become informal safety inspectors: the next time you leave the office, observe any people who are working outdoors. Your checklist should include the fundamental safety drill: fall protection for height exposures; personal protective equipment such as hard hats, work boots and goggles; secure scaffolds and ladders; proper use of machinery (lawnmowers, clippers, circular saws, etc.); proper lifting and efficient material handling.
Here is a safety issue that you are likely to observe in the breach: protection from skin cancer. Exposure to the direct rays of the sun, especially at midday, is a significant safety hazard. Alas, when most people labor in the full sun, they usually take action against the heat, at the expense of protecting themselves from the sun’s rays.
Cancer prevention dictates the wearing of long-sleeved shirts, a hat with neck flaps, sunscreen for exposed skin and sunblock for the nose and lips. When was the last time you saw a landscaper, carpenter or roofer dressed appropriately? When the heat rises, the shirts tend to come off. Bandanas and “do-rags” – considered cool in working circles – keep sweat out of the eyes, but they do little to protect the skin from the sun’s rays. Hats with flaps? Dude, you must be kidding. Goggles and hardhats? They are the first to go when the heat rises.
As for the advice to “avoid exposure between the hours of 10 am and 2 pm,” that is simply not going to happen. There is work to be done and those are prime hours for doing it. Siestas might be culturally acceptable in the tropics, but in our productivity-driven culture, siestas are not an option.
The Compensability Conundrum
As we have pointed out in prior blogs, the connection between work and occupational disease is often difficult to prove. With the exception of public safety employees, most workers face formidable odds in collecting comp for occupational diseases. There often are factors that mitigate against the acceptance of a claim: family history, smoking, fair skin, etc. Workers must be able to prove that workplace exposures are the “predominant cause” of the cancer. Sure, a laborer is under the sun at work; but he or she might also have significant exposure during leisure time, going to the beach, fishing, or just working in the garden.
It’s always interesting to see how state legislatures translate emerging hazards into proposed legislation: lawmakers tend to react in a limited, ad hoc manner. See for example this proposed bill in the New York legislature:

This bill would provide,with respect to active lifeguards employed, for more than 3
consecutive months in a calendar year, by certain local agencies and the Department of Parks and Recreation, that the term “injury” includes skin cancer that develops or manifests itself during the period of the lifeguard’s employment. This bill would further create a
rebuttable presumption that the above injury arises out of and in the course of the lifeguard’s employment if it develops or manifests during the period of the employment.

Note that the symptoms must develop during employment: this in itself may prove problemmatic, as many cancers occur some time after the direct exposure. Beyond that, the bill establishes a compensability presumption for one very limited class of workers, lifeguards. It does not address the myriad workers who face similar hazards on a daily basis (even if their work uniforms involve more than just a bathing suit).
Despite the fact that many workers will develop skin cancers which are likely to be work related, the number of compensable incidents will remain modest. The comp deck remains stacked against workers in the general area of illness.
Compensability and safety are two separate issues. We may not be able to do much about expanding coverage for work-related cancers, but we can take aggressive action to prevent them. It all comes down – as it does so often – to management: do you tolerate your workers’s ad hoc efforts to combat the heat, or do you enforce “best practices” in cancer prevention. Do you make sunscreens and head protection readily available on the jobsite, or do you allow your workers the “individual freedom” to do as they please?
We all know how most managers respond. They take the path of least resistance. The risk of an accident is one thing, the seemingly remote risk of illness is quite another. It will take many more tragic cases of work-related cancers before a true prevention mobilization takes place. For workers struggling under today’s galring sun, we can only hope that a word to the wise is sufficient.