HPs Stayed and Worked Cyanide Issues, Instead of Quitting

[EASlavin@aol.com]

Dear Sandy:

Cheryll and other HP workers were commited to protecting their fellow 
workers. Generally Oak Ridge HPs and techs are greatly respected by the rank 
and file union members: they know they are there to protect them.   Until 
recently, all of K-25 had very few HPs, especially compared to K-25 and Y-12. 

Rather than quit, Cheryll and other HPs stayed and fought.  In 1996, people 
who could have gone out on disability stayed on and worked the cyanide issue. 
 They didn't want to be quitters, and probably would not have been even if 
they were independently wealthy.  

This proves everyone's point that most HPs in the DOE complex try to do their 
job, and proves my point that they are often frustrated by management.  

There's a lot about these issues that will be web posted soon in the fully 
footnoted/endnoted version of my Senate testimony, which deals with 
compensation, coverup, etc.  Cheryll can answer more detailed questions, as 
can other HPs and HP techs in CHE.  I will get you the urls as soon as I know 
them.

Management misinformed the K-25 workers, saying there was no source of 
cyanide at the plant.  Such was not the case.  See chapter 3 of my Senate 
testimony regarding K-25 medical department.  

Again, thank you for your interest.  Look forward to talk to/maybe meeting 
you.

With kindest regards,

Ed

Subj:    Re: Why Didn't They Speak Out Earlier?
Date:   04/06/2000 11:24:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From:   sandyfl@earthlink.net (Sandy Perle)
Sender: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
Reply-to:   radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
To: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu (Multiple recipients of list)

Ed,

Thank you for your reply. I am sure you meant the message for 
me, and not Bill. I understand that since I quoted Steve today, 
when in fact it was one of your quotes I was referring to.

While I understand the economics of the situation, and the stress a 
family must undergo to make ends meet, I still have a difficult time 
reconciling that with the specifics Ms Dyer wrote, and then 
comprehending staying in that situation, solely because of the 
better pay. If the situation was as bad, and I am not saying that I 
don't believe that there were problems, just that I don't know the 
real extent, and the accuracy of what Ms Dyer perceived the 
situation to be, that one's safety has to be a prime consideration. If 
the situation was a serious as stated, and economics the primary 
factor, didn't anyone consider their health whatsoever? If they really 
believed that they were in such serious danger, did they not 
consider what would happen if they became incapacitated? Since I 
have never been in that position, I don't know how I would act. I do 
know that during my career, when there were situations I felt 
strongly about, I stood up. Economics wasn't the issue, but the 
welfare of others was. If the situation were a life-threatening 
occurrence, I would hope that I would have spoken out. There aren't 
enough $$ to compensate for one's health, and being there for the 
family. 

I do appreciate all of the points you bring to the table. I still see too 
much "lawyering" though, and too much play on emotionalism and 
not enough on facts. Don't get me wrong. My son is an attorney, 
so I am not attacking the profession. I just see too many 
statements working emotions and not much in the way of evidence. 
If there has truly been harm done to any worker, nuclear or 
otherwise, and the root causes were known, then I hope that those 
who caused the problems, are handled in the most appropriate 
way. I would just like to see more facts and less rhetoric.

Regards,
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Sandy Perle                 Tel:(714) 545-0100 / (800) 548-5100                 
        
Director, Technical             Extension 2306                      
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Division        Fax:(714) 668-3149                    
            
ICN Biomedicals, Inc.               E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.net               
                           
ICN Plaza, 3300 Hyland Avenue       E-Mail: sperle@icnpharm.com               
        
Costa Mesa, CA 92626

Personal Website:  http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/1205
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html