dusty environment a mask must impose substantial resistance to normal breathing. Consequently the very workers who are suffering from breathing deficiencies are required to shoulder the additional burden of breathing through a filter. When these workers find it impossible to do so they quit. This is one reason why company doctors report few employees are suffering from byssinosis. Another tactic used by the industry to "deal" with the "brown lung" problem is to require employees to take medical exams conducted by company doctors. Theoretically, if the doctor finds workers adversely affected by exposure to cotton dust he is supposed to advise them to transfer to dustfree jobs so their health will not be impaired. In reality such transfers are extremely rare since they are not perceived as being in the interest of the worker or the company. The worker has no assurance that his wages or status will be maintained if he is transferred so he will deny symptoms of disease. The company has difficulty finding dust-free jobs for transferees and, besides, transfers tend to disrupt normal operations. Moreover, an employee transferred for medical reasons represents a potential Workers' Compensation claim. The fact is that company medical exam programs are directed at minimizing potential Workers' Compensation liability rather than solving the byssinosis problem. The textile industry spokesman at the subcommittee's October 3rd hearing culminated his attack on OSHA with the claim that "OSHA has issued a (cotton dust) standard which is technologically and economically infeasible However, in response to the Chairman's questioning Mr. Lanier detailed some of the extensive new technology currently available to the industry for reducing dust levels, including automatic bale handling equipment; enclosed chutes from bale-opening to the carding operation, eliminating the picking process (which emits considerable dust into the workers' environment); enclosed carding machines; automatic waste-baling equipment. The The performance of these and other new machines belies industry's claim that the new standard is infeasible. Surveys conducted under the direction of the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health show that the permissible exposure limit of 200 micrograms per cubic meter in yarn manufacturing is capable of being met by the use of existing technology. limit of 750 micrograms/m3 in slashing and weaving operations is already being met in the large majority of mills (accounting for 72% of the looms, according to testimony of Mr. Hoven Hocutt, ATMI's expert witness at the OSHA standard hearings.) The industry has attempted to confuse the issue of economic feasibility by introducing grossly inflated estimates of the cost of installing engineering controls. These estimates are at variance not only with the Labor Department's assessments but with those which the industry iteself has made in another forum. In 1974 the ATMI submitted its estimate of the cost of complying with a 200-microgram cotton dust standard in all operations (not just yarn manufacturing) to the Treasury Department in connection with an application for liberalization of depreciation rules under the Internal Revenue Code. This estimate came to $447 million. Now the ATMI has boosted its estimate to $2.6 billion. This kind of self-serving exaggeration does not merit serious consideration. It is the same irresponsible numbers game that every industry confronted by new OSHA standards has played. We are too familiar with the vinyl chloride story to give credence to these industry cries of "Wolf!" The fact is that the vinyl chloride industry, the asbestos industry and every other industry compelled to meet more stringent occupational health standards has responded by developing technological improvements wherever necessary to fulfill their obligations. In the case of cotton textiles there is no need to develop new technology. The technology exists today and is in use in many mills producing cotton products at a profit. Indeed, investment in the necessary new machinery has paid for itself since the new technology generally operates at a faster rate and in a more efficient manner than the old. The industry's claim that the result of the new standard "may be 'protecting' workers right out of their jobs, is the cruelest hoax of all. It is an attempt to play on the pervasive fear of unemployment. Surely this hoary threat needs no extended rebuttal to lay it to rest. The fact is that the so-called non-productive investment required by the cotton dust standard is bound to benefit the industry through higher productivity and lower unit costs of production. Far from leading to the loss of jobs, the new cotton dust standard will contribute to an invigorating modernization of the industry at the same time as it protects the health of textile workers. The Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union, AFL-CIO commends OSHA for withstanding industry pressures and issuing a cotton dust standard which places the responsibility for safeguarding the health of workers where it belongs: on the employers to institute engineering controls to reduce the exposure of workers to safe levels. We are not satisfied with the levels set by OSHA; nor can we condone the 4-year delay the agency has allowed for implementing control programs. We intend to pursue these objections through the judicial review procedures established by the Act. The industry's efforts to prevent the standard from being effectuated through Congressional amendments to appropriations bills, banning enforcement of the standard, are contrary to the intent of Congress in enacting the law and can only lead to the subversion of the Occupational Safety and Health Act. October 18, 1978 Respectufully submitted, Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union, George Perkel, Director Occupational Safety and Health |