Would you trust this man with your safety?

A UK member of parliament referred to in the press as a Conservative Party ‘attack dog’ and who previously worked for a PR firm that creates front organisations for polluting industries is the new health and safety minister.

Chris Grayling, who was shadow Home Secretary before the election but whose star appears to have fallen after a sequence of gaffes and sleaze allegations which left even the rabidly pro-Tory Telegraph bemused, is now minister of state at the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP). He reports to DWP secretary of state Iain Duncan Smith.

Mr Grayling, who has been MP for Epsom and Ewell since 2001, started his career as a BBC and Channel 4 journalist before moving into public relations.

His website notes he subsequently became “a director in the Employee Communication practice at international communications firm Burson-Marsteller. He ended his time there as the firm’s European Marketing Director.”

The company is well-known in trade union, health and safety and environmental activist circles. Burson-Marsteller is one of the more prominent ‘union busting‘ firms and has acted on behalf of asbestos, tobacco, nuclear and chemical firms on regulatory and compensation issues.

It is also regarded as a pioneer in the creation of ‘astroturf’ organisations, supposedly grassroots lobbying organisations that in fact support industry arguments.

In ‘Doubt is their product’, academic David Michaels – who is now the head of the US government’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration, says the company created the cleverly named ‘Foundation for Clean Air Progress.’

He writes: “The organisation is run by Burson-Marsteller, the PR firm, using funds provided by the petroleum, trucking and other polluting industries.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments closed

We told you BP couldn’t be trusted

OIL SLICK  Directors of BPs London-based global board, including current CEO Tony Hayward, seem to be above justice when it comes to the firms work safety and environmental crimes.

OIL SLICK Directors of BP's London-based global board, including current CEO Tony Hayward, seem to be above justice when it comes to the firm's serial workplace safety and environmental crimes. But nice guys can (and do) kill you.

US President Barack Obama has vowed to end the “cosy relationship” between oil companies and US regulators in the light of the April 2010 Gulf of Mexico disaster. He also condemned “the ridiculous spectacle” of oil executives “falling over each other to point the finger of blame,” the BBC and other media reported.

Federal regulators had, the president said, sometimes approved drilling plans based on the oil companies’ promises to use safe practices. The rule from now on, he said, would be “trust but verify.” For some though, this is too little, too late.

If more attention had been paid to BP’s deadly workplace safety record – the oil giant owns the well that continues to spew oil into the Gulf – then it would have been shockingly apparent that trust was never warranted.

A Center for Public Integrity analysis published on 16 May 2010 found refineries owned by the oil giant account for 97 per cent of all flagrant violations found in the refining industry by Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) safety inspectors over the past three years.

This isn’t a matter of technical infringements. It is about corporate bad behaviour that could kill. In some instances the violations related to grievous failings that did actually kill, and kill a lot.

Hazards has been tracking BP’s safety record for years and the apparent impunity of the company’s decision makers. The disaster-prone London-based board generally escapes criticism from politicians in the US, UK and elsewhere, uses slick PR to fend off press attacks and has evaded all blame and punishment for a sequence of industrial and environmental catastrophes.

These board members are wealthy, respectable upstanding members of the community. They rub shoulders with the powerful – hell, they live in the same neighbourhoods, their kids go to the same schools. And they don’t die at work – they just make the decisions that consign others to an early grave.

Former CEO Lord John Browne was only brought down by a personal scandal; he escaped unscathed from the damning criticism spelled out in investigations after the 2005 Texas City refinery blast that killed 15 and injured 170 more. But despite official enquiry-determined culpability– he even signed off the company’s safety policy prior to the disaster – Lord Browne still enjoys a seat in the House of Lords, one of the UK’s two Houses of Parliament, and remains a government-appointed trustee of the Tate Gallery.

Lord Browne’s successor, Tony Hayward (pictured top), was BP’s second-in-command when Texas City exploded, and became chief executive in 2007. He has been in top management positions for over a decade, and was made an executive vice-president in 2002, the year BP received a then-record UK safety fine of £1m after being prosecuted by the UK government’s Health and Safety Executive (HSE) for criminal safety offences at Scotland’s Grangemouth refinery. He “chairs the group operations risk committee (GORC) which oversees safety performance,” notes the company’s website.

BP’s website also spells out the practices “we implement in pursuit of our goal of ‘no accidents, no harm to people and no damage to the environment’.”

It asserts: “Our commitment to safe, reliable and responsible operations starts with the group chief executive Tony Hayward and his leadership team: a commitment that filters down through the organization and is regularly communicated to all staff.”

On paper at least, responsibility for safety – and safety failings – goes right to the top.

There is now, tragically, another opportunity for the London-based board to be made to face up to that responsibility. Eleven workers died in the latest disaster linked to BP, when an explosion destroyed Tranocean’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig on 20 April 2010. The rig was operated on behalf of  BP. White House officials have indicated the president will set up a commission to investigate the disaster. They say the panel will also examine industry practices and the government’s role in an incident that has seen oil spewing into the Gulf since the rig exploded.

President Obama would establish a presidential commission by executive order, White House officials said. The officials, who spoke to journalists on condition of anonymity, said the commission would be similar to panels created to investigate the space shuttle Challenger disaster in 1986 and the nuclear accident at Three Mile Island in 1979.

It would also study oil industry practices, rig safety, regulation and governmental oversight, including the functions of the Minerals Management Service (MMS) – the agency responsible for regulating offshore oil drilling, but which is also responsible for administering oil leases and with that government revenue from oil.

BRITISH POLLUTERS  Environmental group Greenpeace rebranded BPs global HQ in London on 20 May.

BRITISH POLLUTERS Environmental group Greenpeace rebranded BP's global HQ in London on 20 May.

A congressional hearing this month was told BP was aware of equipment problems aboard the Deepwater Horizon rig hours before the explosion. The House of Representatives’ energy and commerce committee said documents and company briefings suggested that well owner BP, rig owner Transocean and Halliburton, which made the cement casing for the well, ignored tests in the hours before the explosion that indicated faulty safety equipment.

President Obama clarified the position on 22 May: “First and foremost, what led to this disaster was a breakdown of responsibility on the part of BP and perhaps others, including Transocean and Halliburton,” he said.

These are not just serious issues, they are life and death issues. Refineries and rigs explode and workers die, families are bereaved. If board members can accept the bonuses and fat pay cheques when things go right, they must also accept the consequences when things go wrong. That means an appearance in court and, if found guilty, a lengthy spell in jail. This is not about blame. It is about justice.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Comments closed

US president’s panel calls for cancer precaution

CATCHING CANCER  Authorities in the US and the UK have both seriously under-estimated the extend of occupational and environmental cancers, new reports show.

CATCHING CANCER Authorities in the US and the UK have both seriously under-estimated the extent of occupational and environmental cancers, new reports show.

Policymakers in the US should abandon a reactionary approach to regulation of cancer causing chemicals and champion a precautionary approach, top advisers to Barack Obama have said. Their report comes on the heels of a UK study of occupational cancer numbers which shows the official estimates cited routinely by both US and UK authorities have greatly under-played the extent of the problem.

This month’s strongly worded report by the President’s Cancer Panel says exposure to carcinogens at work and in the wider environment poses a serious threat to the US population, causing “grievous harm” that government agencies including the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) have not adequately addressed. The panel reports directly to the president. Reducing environmental cancer risk: What we can do now says the US government has “grossly under-estimated” the problem because of a lack of research. Much of the suffering faced by people diagnosed with toxin-related cancer could have been prevented, according to the 240-page report.

A cover letter to the report co-signed by panel members LaSalle D Leffall Jr and Margaret L Kripke notes “the public is becoming increasingly aware of the unacceptable burden of cancer resulting from environmental and occupational exposures that could have been prevented through appropriate national action… our nation still has much work ahead to identify the many existing but unrecognised environmental carcinogens and eliminate those that are known from our workplaces, schools, and homes.”
Read More »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments closed

Can Samsung be green and cancerous?

DEATH TWEET After the leukaemia death of 23-year-old Samsung worker Park Ji-yeon on 31 March 2010, the company went on Twitter to offer an expression of mourning. But the company’s management is insisting Samsung’s problem is not one of chemicals and cancer, but of communication.

DEATH TWEET After the leukaemia death of 23-year-old Samsung worker Park Ji-yeon on 31 March 2010, the company went on Twitter to offer an expression of mourning. But the company’s management is insisting Samsung’s problem is not one of chemicals and cancer, but of communication.

On 31 March 2010, 23-year-old Park Ji-yeon died of leukaemia. She contracted the blood cancer at the age of 20 after working at the Samsung semiconductor factory in Onyang, South Korea. Her case is part of a cancer cluster affecting workers at the microelectronics giant.

Samsung’s response to a high profile campaign for justice for the cancer victims – a flat denial – sits uneasily alongside the company’s claims to sustainability and all round inclusiveness. Samsung’s website, on pages that describe the firm’s “main approaches to sustainability” and which highlight its desire to “build positive relationships” with everyone from NGOs, to employees, to “Global Society”, notes: “In every area of Samsung’s business, we work to improve our global society.” It adds: “We have designated economic, environmental and social responsibilities as the key elements of our sustainable management.”

But can a company stand accused of exposing workers to substances that are known to cause cancers and make any claim to sustainability? And can it maintain a credible claim to “sustainable management” if it dismisses the concerns of cancer victims out of hand?

Greenpeace for one is not convinced. On 3 March 2010, Greenpeace climbers scaled the Benelux headquarters of the Korean electronics giant, displaying the message ‘Samsung = Broken Promises’ in giant letters on the front of the building. The peaceful protest targeted the company for breaking its promises to eliminate key toxic substances from its products – including known human carcinogens.

Campaigners in Korea have so far collated evidence suggesting 23 Samsung workers employed at plants in the country have suffered from haematopoietic cancers like leukaemia or lymphoma, and at least nine workers have died. Samsung workers are also known to suffer from skin disorders, neuropathy, fertility problems including miscarriages, and chronic nosebleeds.

On 2 April 2010, following a funeral ceremony for Park Ji-yeon, Supporters for the Health and Rights of People in the Semiconductor industry (SHARPS), a coalition of trade unions and campaign groups, organised a press conference at Samsung headquarters in Seoul, calling the company to account for the cancer deaths. The police broke up the event and detained seven activists. They were held until 5 April, when they were released without charge.

SHARPS says the pattern of cancer deaths at Samsung’s Korean factories “bears a striking resemblance to the pattern of cancer deaths among IBM ‘chip’ workers in the US and to other electronics cancer clusters around the world.”

Together with Asia Monitor Resource Centre (AMRC), Asian Network for the Rights of Occupational Accident Victims (ANROAV) and the International Campaign for Responsible Technology (ICRT) it is seeking support for a petition to the president of the Korean government Gee-sung Choi, the CEO of Samsung Electronics, the Korean minister of labour, the president of the Korea Workers’ Compensation & Welfare Service and the head of the Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency.

This demands justice for cancer victims and improvements in safety standards, and adds Samsung “must disclose to the workers and the public the truth about the hazards of working in the semiconductor industry” and “must stop suppressing workers in their struggles for a safe and fair workplace.”

The response from the electronics giant has been to launch a major public relations charm offensive. On 15 April 2010, Samsung invited reporters to a microchip plant south of Seoul to demonstrate its manufacturing process and to provide assurances about its commitment to safety. “There is no risk,” said Cho Soo-in, president of the company’s memory division, adding: “From now on, we will openly conduct management that has its basis in communication.”

Injury lawyer Mandy Hawes, who has won landmark legal cases for US workers suffering devastating health problems including cancers as a result of working in the electronic industry and who is supporting the Korean campaigners, posed this question in response: “How many more electronics workers would be alive and well if over the past 30 years Samsung and its semiconductor industry brethren had made hazard communication as much as a priority as ‘branding’ or other market-based ‘communication’, strategies?”

The campaign launched a new ‘Stop Samsung’ website on 23 April 2010. SHARPS says it “presents a compelling case for why those of us who depend on our cell phones, our TVs, our computers, and other high-tech things that now dominate our lives should care about the people – mostly young women – who make them.”

See the SHARPS video.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments closed

Deadly criminals need policing

CREDIBILITY GULF When it comes to workplace safety and environmental crimes, BP has a lot of experience.

CREDIBILITY GULF When it comes to workplace safety and environmental tragedies, BP has a lot of relevant experience. Record fines haven't made a dent in its profits.

Whether the problem is blood spilled in the workplace or oil spilled in the oceans, a series of recent disasters show why more regulation of profit-hungry industries is needed.

“Twenty-nine dead coal miners in West Virginia, seven dead workers at an oil refinery in Washington State and 11 dead on a Gulf of Mexico oil rig followed by an ecological calamity, all in the span of a month, illustrate in blood the need for more regulation and stiffer enforcement,” said Leo W Gerard, president of the United Steelworkers (USW). He added: “Improving regulation and enforcement may cost money. But then, what is the value of the lives of those 47 workers killed in three workplace explosions in one month? What is the value of the oil-polluted Gulf waters and coastline?”

He said BP was a “perfect example” of why it is better to regulate than clean up the mess after disasters. The London-based multinational was found to be at fault in the March 2005 Texas City refinery blast that killed 15 workers and injured 170 more. But lessons weren’t learned and more offences, deaths and disasters followed.

“These were not natural disasters, not earthquakes like in Haiti or hurricanes like Katrina,” said USW’s Leo Gerard. “These are man-made disasters.” After the Texas City tragedy, USW met with oil industry representatives in an attempt to write new safety guidelines. “USW vice president Gary Beevers abandoned the effort because he felt the industry was more concerned about image than safety,” recalls Gerard. “As this year of fatal explosions has tragically illustrated, less government is a problem. More regulation is the solution.”

The Gulf of Mexico disaster – it became a disaster for BP not when 11 workers died, but when it became apparent the company was facing a costly environmental catastrophe as the Deepwater Horizon oil slick slimed the US coast – was not prevented by market forces, or self-regulation. Nor were earlier disasters, where it was workers that were the victims.

According to ‘The bottom line’, published this month in Hazards magazine: “On 27 April 2010, just one week after a Gulf of Mexico oil rig hired by the company exploded with the loss of 11 lives, the London-based multinational said its profits hit for the first three months of 2010 $5.6 billion (£3.6bn), up 135 per cent on the same quarter last year.” It adds: “Oil lapping against a shore is bad news for a company, and the bad smell lingers. Workplace deaths, though, don’t cause lasting reputational harm, because the bottom line really is the bottom line for investors.

“The 2010 first quarter bumper profits, exceeding market expectations, came after a quarter in which BP attracted the USA’s largest ever safety fine. The 30 October 2009 penalty, at $87.4 million, was for failing to remedy safety problems identified after the Texas City refinery blast.

“The money markets, inevitably, weren’t interested. BP earned $2.6 million profit every hour round the clock for the first quarter of 2010. It could pay off the fine with profits pocketed before lunch on 2 January.”

The article notes that “while the official safety agencies talk tough after a disaster, the companies can frequently enjoy their quiet support or at least benefit from their regulatory impotence between outbreaks of bloodshed.

“BP had successfully lobbied against more stringent US offshore safety regulations and oversight prior to the Deepwater Horizon blast. In the UK, as a series of investigations left the safety reputation of BP’s London-based global board in tatters, The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) continued to feature the company as an exemplar of ‘director leadership’.  The case history was only removed in November 2009, after the official PR for BP was exposed by Hazards.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments closed

Recycling giant gets six figure fine after death

NOT SUSTAINABLE Sims was named as a global recycling leader while awaiting an appearance in court on criminal safety charges relating to a workplace death.

NOT SUSTAINABLE Metal recycling giant Sims was named as a global recycling leader while awaiting an appearance in court on criminal safety charges relating to a workplace death.

A global metals and electronics recycling company which claims to have “the very highest” standards of health and safety has received a six figure safety fine for criminal safety breaches after a lorry driver died when a crushed car fell from a scrapheap.

The UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecuted Sims Group UK Ltd, part of the worldwide Sims Metal Management group, after truck driver Adrian Turner was crushed by a metal bale which rolled off the heap at the firm’s yard in Newport, south Wales.

Mr Turner, 50, from Wolverhampton, was delivering scrap to the site on 28 April 2008 and was directed to deliver his load to the metal shredder area of the yard. He left his cab and was opening the rear doors to his trailer when the one and a half ton metal bale on the scrap pile came loose and rolled down 20 feet straight into Mr Turner. He had not received any site safety induction from Sims UK Ltd and was following instructions given by Sims operatives when he was killed.

Sims Group UK Ltd pleaded guilty to safety offences. At Cardiff Crown Court on 14 April, the company was fined £200,000 and ordered to pay £57,500 costs.

HSE inspector Sarah Baldwin-Jones said: “Metal recycling yards can be extremely dangerous places so it’s imperative companies have safe working procedures and systems in place that are observed by all staff and contractors.”

A statement from the bereaved family said: “While the financial penalty handed down to Sims Group UK Ltd today offers little comfort to our family we hope that it serves a warning to those companies operating in the waste recycling industry. It should be an absolute priority to ensure death and injury to employees and others on site is avoided. We have been torn apart by Adrian’s death and wish that no other family has to endure the loss of a loved one in the manner we did.”

The death and the criminal safety prosecution do not appear to have overly tarnished the firm’s reputation.

In February 2010, parent company Sims Metal Management was named ‘Best Recycler of the Decade’ by UK trade magazine Materials Recycling Week (MRW).

MRW editor, Paul Sanderson, said: “Sims Metal Management is a huge global metals and electronics recycling company which has enjoyed a decade of international success. It has made acquisitions all over the world and built a new state of the art WEEE recycling facility in the UK, supporting the UK economy and providing jobs. Sims Metal Management is a true giant in the sector.”

Commenting on the best recycler recognition, Sims spokesperson Myles Pilkington said the company was “proud of the enormous strides forward we have taken in recent years in the areas of sustainability, health and safety and energy efficiency, all of which have enabled us to operate to the very highest international, environmental, health and safety and legally compliant standards.”

Also this year, Sims Metal Management was listed in the Global Top 100 Most Sustainable Corporations published by business publication Corporate Knights.

Group chief executive officer Dan Dienst commented: “Sims Metal Management’s inclusion is testimony to the company’s commitment to, and effective management of, the societal, environmental and governance factors impacting our business. We strive, as in all things, to do the right thing and always with a sense of urgency. Doing good and doing well are not mutually exclusive propositions at Sims Metal Management.”

That will be scant consolation to the family of Adrian Turner. Nor was this Sims’ only recent UK prosecution for criminal health and safety and safety breaches.

In February 2008, it was fined £13,000 and ordered to pay costs of £11,663.73 after an employee was injured when conveyors running to a fragmentiser at its Wimborne, Dorset, site started unexpectedly whilst he and a colleague were clearing a blockage.

The Health and Safety Executive, which prosecuted the company in both cases, still lists the company as a case history on good practice in the recycling industry.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments closed

Green construction is no safer

Green construction is no less hazardous for workers than the less environmentally concerned alternative, a US study has found.

Researchers from Oregon State University and East Carolina University compared reportable injury and illness rates at sites building to the highly sought after green Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standard with comparable conventional sites. 

The study concluded: “There appears to be little or no difference between green and non-green projects in terms of construction worker safety and health. With both green and non-green buildings having the same safety performance, a question arises as to whether LEED buildings should be labelled as sustainable buildings.”

In a separate paper in the same issue of the Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, the same authors call for a sustainable construction safety and health (SCSH) rating system to “rate projects based on the importance given to construction worker safety and health and the degree of implementation of safety and health elements.”

The public health blog The Pump Handle backs the approach. A 15 April blog entry notes: “What a great idea! This takes a LEED-like approach to rating worker safety and health.

“Now, how do we roll out this good idea with LEED-like flare and fanfare such that occupational safety and health becomes as attractive and interesting to the masses as the concept of green buildings?”

  •  S Rajendran and others. Impact of green building design and construction on worker safety and health, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, volume 135, issue 10, pages 1058-1066, 2009 [abstract].
  • S Rajendran and others. Development and initial validation of Sustainable Construction Safety and Health Rating System, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, volume 135, issue 10, pages 1067-1075, 2009 [abstract].
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments closed

Watchdog ‘interventions’ at deadly waste firms

Major UK waste and recycling firms are to be the target of “central interventions” by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in a bid to address the sector’s appalling health and safety record.

HSE says it is acting after its first targeted waste programme “arrested the rising accident rate and brought about a small reduction” but adds “the accident rate is still high (typically 4 times the all industry average for all injuries to workers and typically 9 times the all industry average for fatal injuries to workers).”

It says the interventions will “be undertaken to assess the safety management systems of national waste management and recycling companies who undertake waste and recycling collection services,” with the following firms targeted: Biffa Waste Management Limited; European Metal Recycling Limited; Enterprise Limited; May Guerney Recycling (aka ECT Recycling); SERCO Limited; Shanks Waste Management Limited; Sita UK Limited; Veolia Environmental Services Limited; Verdant Group plc; and Viridor Waste Management Limited.

A number of these firms have recent prosecutions for serious safety breaches.

The union GMB has campaigned for manslaughter charges to be brought in the case of member Dennis Krauesslar, 59, who was killed on 10 September 2007 by a mechanical digger when depositing grass cuttings at Biffa’s Newbury recycling centre. Biffa pleaded guilty to related safety charges in February 2010.

Veolia was fined £100,000 and ordered to pay £22,000 costs at Birmingham Crown Court in July 2009 for a health and safety breach that led to a worker being seriously injured in a fall.  In February 2010, the company, which says it is the UK’s leading waste and recycling firm and which parades its environmental and safety credentials, was fined £130,000 after a worker was killed when a 1,100-litre recycling bin fell on his head.

And European Metal Recycling Ltd was fined £2,500 and £2,454 costs in October 2008 after an agency worker suffered serious injuries in a fall from a lorry.

An HSE Sector Information Minute (SIM), spelling out the purpose and methods of the interventions, notes: “If examination of the overall safety management system through the topics inspected provides (in the inspectors judgement) sufficient evidence to indicate a breach of legislation, then the need for any enforcement action should be considered in accordance with the Enforcement Management Model (EMM) and normal operational considerations should apply.”

It adds that inspectors should consider “director leadership” and “worker engagement” in the firms.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments closed

Recycling firm fined after arson attack

A York hazardous waste recycling company has been fined £40,000 and £6,110 costs for failing to safeguard flammable liquid that was used in an arson attack on the business.

BCB Environmental Management Limited pleaded guilty at Harrogate Magistrates Court to breaches of the Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 (DSEAR) after illegally processing drums of volatile chemicals close to unprotected electrical equipment and forklift trucks.

The breaches came to light during a joint investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and North Yorkshire Police following an arson attack by a former employee in October 2008. The arsonist, who was later convicted for his crime, had ready access to the drums, which he ignited to start a blaze.

After the hearing HSE inspector Stephen Britton commented: “BCB Environmental Management Ltd processed drums containing flammable liquid close to unprotected electrical equipment, creating a real risk that they could have gone up at any time.”

He said the “prosecution offers food for thought, not just for the management at BCB, but for all involved in the recycling industry working with similar equipment and materials; they must adhere to the relevant legislation at all times to protect lives.”

HSE inspectors also found a dangerous drum crushing machine in use at BCB, which contravened the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. The court heard that a vital safety guard was missing from the machine, which exposed operators to dangerous internal mechanics, including a hydraulic ram capable of applying two tonnes of pressure.

Furthermore, employees would have struggled to stop the crusher should an accident have occurred because the safety stop switch was covered in grime and was almost unrecognisable.

HSE’s Stephen Britton added: “The removal of a safety guard on the drum crushing machine is unbelievable. The guard is there for one reason and one reason only, to protect workers. The consequences of exposing human limbs to a two tonne hydraulic crusher would be horrific.”

BCB’s news release after the 14 October 2008 fire was headed: “Fire in storage shed controlled. No-one hurt.” It quotes managing director Phil Boardman: “Although this was potentially serious, it has demonstrated the robustness of our safety procedures.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments closed

Greenpeace adds to Samsung cancer pressure

BROKEN PROMISE  Samsung is being urged to accept responsibility for occupational cancers. But Greenpeace says it has reneged on a promise to eliminate cancer-causing chemicals.

CANCER CAUSE Samsung is being urged to accept responsibility for work cancers. But Greenpeace says it has reneged on a promise to eliminate cancer-causing chemicals.

A global electronics giant embroiled in an occupational cancer scandal has been accused by Greenpeace of reneging on a promise to phase out toxic chemicals linked to cancer and other diseases.

This week climbers from the environmental group scaled the Benelux headquarters of the Korean multinational Samsung, sticking the message “Samsung = Broken Promises” in giant letters onto the front of the building.  

In June 2004, Samsung was the first company to publicly commit to eliminate PVC – a well-established cause of occupational cancers – and brominated flame retardants (BFRs) from new models of all its products.

In 2006 Samsung committed to phasing out BFRs from its products by the start of 2010 and in 2007 it committed to a deadline of end 2010 for the phase out of PVC. Both moves saw the company gain points and position on Greenpeace’s Guide to Greener Electronics.

Greenpeace says Samsung  is now “betraying its customers trust” in only admitted weeks before it was due to deliver new greener products that it would fail and break its promise. The latest version of the Guide penalises Samsung for this delay. Unless the company takes urgent action to meet its commitments, says Greenpeace, it will suffer a further penalty in the next edition – the first company ever to do so. Read More »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments closed