Hanford Man Misreads E-mail, Misunderstands All

[EASlavin@aol.com]

Dear Mr. Aldrich:

Thank you for speaking out.  It was good to hear from you.  The compensation 
I propose is basically the one Congress established for Black Lung victims 
(the interim presumption) before medical standards are in place.  

Since DOE controlled the data, the epi studies, the science, the health 
physics and the industrial hygiene, why in the name of all that's holy do  
you want to put the burden of proof on the sick and dying victims of DOE?  
How much do you think that would cost per case?  

My Friend AL BROOKS of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, as well as Senator Fred Thompson 
and other Republican Senators support a system where the burden of proof is 
not on the worker.  The first nuclear weapons worker compensation bill was 
proposed by Senator Albert Gore, Sr. in 1958 and 1962. Show some compassion.  

Since the polluters would pay the cost of compensating their victims under my 
proposal, why are you so sanctimonious about the cost to your "billfold"?  Do 
you mean out of your dividends?  Do you work for DOE or a contractor?

And no, I did not say that anyone made a "pact with the devil."   I said that 
an enviro from a respected group once said that, and that is part of the bad 
attitudes.  Part of the problem with DOE folks like you is that you think you 
know everything, you don't pay attention, and you misquote other people, 
marginalizing them.  Go back and read what I wrote and then form an informed 
opinion.  Please.  Now.Read before you write.  Think before you opine.  
Understand first, ask questions, and shoot later.  People might think you are 
an anti-literate enegumen, like the ones who attacked the Tennessean and the 
sick Oak Ridge workers.


In one Hanford whistleblower case, a tatterdemalion "malcontent" managers, a 
former Air Force colonel, gathered 15 notebooks full of documents, including 
religious tracts given to a whistleblower's friend.  The DOE  IG asked the 
friend to wear a wire to get the whistleblower, not to investigate 
retaliation.  This was because the whistleblower was suspected of being a 
"mole" for Rep. John Dingell, Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce 
Committee.  IMHO, Hanford management has no respect for Constitutional and 
civil rights.  Possibly Hanford management hates America, and prefers the 
authoritarian models of China, Cuba, North Korea, Iraq.

IMHO, DOE Richland Operations management has delusions of adequacy.  Do you 
support or defend their actions?  Apparently so. What a pity.

You should carefully read my testimony, "DOE's Toxic, Hostile Working 
Environment Violates Human Rights," particularly Chapters 4 & 5. I will post 
the web url soon.  

You sir, do sound like a malconent, a whiner, or whatever revealing ad 
hominems you directed in my clients' direction.  In  short, it sounds like a 
personal  problem, maybe even an emotional problem, with protected activity.  
I don't know of any "big" whistleblower settlements by DOE or its 
contractors, anywhere.  You sound like you have whistleblower envy.  Have you 
been a witness in any Hanford whistleblower cases?  What is your title?  Are 
you a manager?  How many people in your organization?  Have you ever sat down 
and talked with any of the Hanford whistleblowers?  Have  you ever met them?  
Or are you basing your opinion about whistleblowers on what the Hanford 
contractor surveillance crew has told you?

As Robert Kennedy once wrote to Senator James O. Eastland, "repent now, 
there's still time."

With kindest regards,

Ed Slavin


In a message dated 04/06/2000 7:44:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
L_K_II_Les_Aldrich@RL.gov writes:

<< In fact, the thing about DOE that infuriates me is
 their tendency to pay off "sick" workers or whining malcontents (some call
 them whistleblowers) instead of standing up to them.  And no, I don't
 believe that all whistleblowers are whining malcontents, but I do believe
 that all whining malcontents are rewarded with the title and protection of
 "whistleblower" regardless of their lack of education,experience, or
 knowledge that would qualify them to decide what is safe and what is not.
  >>
Subj:    RE: Without Honor in Their Own Country
Date:   04/06/2000 7:44:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From:   L_K_II_Les_Aldrich@RL.gov
Sender: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
Reply-to:   radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
To: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu (Multiple recipients of list)

Now you've gone too far.  This is exactly why some of us get upset about
"sick" workers whining for benefits.  Invariably, it does not matter whether
working in nuclear facilities caused them to be sick.  All that matters is
that they are sick and they used to work in a nuclear facility, so the
government (out of my billfold) better just pay up.  That's as wrong as
dismissing their complaints as having no basis.  Its still a case of taking
an action without investigating whether or not the action is appropriate.

By the way, I've spent 26 of my 33 years as a radiation protection person
working for DOE contractors, and I don't agree with your opinion that "DOE"
or "nuclear facility managers" (both groups with no face or personality that
can be attacked at will) made a pact with the devil or operated with
deliberate evil intent. In fact, the thing about DOE that infuriates me is
their tendency to pay off "sick" workers or whining malcontents (some call
them whistleblowers) instead of standing up to them.  And no, I don't
believe that all whistleblowers are whining malcontents, but I do believe
that all whining malcontents are rewarded with the title and protection of
"whistleblower" regardless of their lack of education,experience, or
knowledge that would qualify them to decide what is safe and what is not.

That's just my opinion.

Les Aldrich
l_k_ii_les_aldrich@rl.gov

> -----Original Message-----
> From: EASlavin@aol.com [SMTP:EASlavin@aol.com]
> 
> Dear Steve:
> 
> perhaps 
> some of you could offer suggestions about how to draft the "interim 
> presumption" for the workers' compensation legislation, so that those who 
> have illnesses can be compensated without having to prove causation.
> 
> With kindest regards,
> 
> Ed Slavin
> 
> 
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html