Registered: Mar 2002
Location: Mountains
Posts: 4689

Wired News

SAN FRANCISCO -- The first of about 250 worker health lawsuits filed against IBM across the country reaches a critical juncture in a California court this month, when a judge rules on whether to let the case of four cancer-stricken former employees go to trial.

The four have charged they were poisoned by chemicals while working at an IBM electronics factory in San Jose. Workers at IBM plants in Minnesota and New York have made similar claims.

An epidemiologist hired by the workers said in court documents he found "alarming" results on the incidence of cancer in death records kept by IBM for 30,000 employees.

But IBM insists there is no scientific evidence supporting the claims. It further argues it is protected by a California workers' compensation law that prohibits employees from suing employers for damages in most cases.

The plaintiffs have sought an exception on the grounds that IBM knew workers were being exposed to systemic chemical poisoning and did not tell them. In response, IBM has argued that chemical poisoning does not identify a particular injury as the law requires.

Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Robert Baines on Sept. 26 is scheduled to hear motions by IBM, as well as some of its chemical suppliers, to dismiss the case. If that request is denied, a trial is scheduled for October. Another 36 lawsuits against IBM have been filed related to the San Jose plant.

In 2001, IBM settled a lawsuit filed by two former workers who claimed that their exposure to chemicals in a New York electronics plant caused severe birth defects in their son. IBM did not admit liability in the case and cited the potential cost of a long-running trial.

"These are tragic cases," said IBM spokesman Bill Hughes, "but there is no scientific evidence that there are increased rates of diseases of any kind among IBM employees."

IBM's semiconductor manufacturing facility in San Jose employed about 50,000 people since 1965, and was sold to Japan's Hitachi last year.

The case has stirred up a years-old controversy over claims that working conditions inside electronics and microchip plants sickened employees and gave their children birth defects.

The kind of assembly work conducted by the employees in the suit -- Alida Hernandez, James Moore, Maria Santiago, along with representatives of the deceased Suzanne Rubio -- has dwindled in recent years in the United States as some older equipment has been shut down or exported to Asia, a lower-cost production center.

Environmental advocates claim that electronics workers have suspiciously high rates of miscarriages, brain cancer and other illnesses. The employees at the San Jose plant say they have worked with known carcinogens such as benzene, ethyl alcohol, and vinyl chloride.

"They're being exposed to many, many chemicals, all at one time," said Ted Smith, executive director of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, an environmental advocacy group.

Last year, an evaluation conducted for the Semiconductor Industry Association, of which IBM is a member, showed no definitive proof to support the claims of either side. The group is now investigating whether a more complete investigation is feasible.

"We have always had as our top priority protecting the health and safety of our workers, and that's been a program we've had underway for the last 20 years," said George Scalise, president of the association.

According to documents filed with the court, an epidemiologist at the Boston University School of Public Health, hired by the workers, has said he has reviewed a database of death records for more than 30,000 IBM employees who died between 1969 and 2000.

That so-called corporate mortality file, according to Dr. Richard Clapp, showed that IBM employees who worked in manufacturing jobs had a significantly increased risk of dying of certain types of cancer. Deaths from breast cancer for women workers at the San Jose plant were higher than in the general population, he said.

"IBM employees have suffered much more than their expected share of cancer," Clapp said, according to a declaration filed with the court.

Clapp could not be reached for further comment.

IBM's Hughes said its file was maintained for the purpose of providing benefits to families of deceased employees, and as such was an invalid way to study rates of disease.

IBM has commissioned scientists at the University of Alabama at Birmingham to conduct a study on cancer incidence and mortality at three of its manufacturing plants. Conclusions from that study were not yet available.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2001
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2451

quote:

---

In response, IBM has argued that chemical poisoning does not identify a particular injury as the law requires.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged