Some Employers Don't Care If Their Workers Die Of Heatstroke

It appears that some industries really don't care if low wage
workers die in climate change driven, worsening heat waves. 

Yes, I know hot weather is over for the year for pretty much all of the nation, but I'm still stewing big time about a Washington Post article I ran across this past August.  

The headline is infuriating enough: "As Temperatures rise, Industries Fight Heat Safeguards For Workers."

Basically, the gist of the article is this: Many employers don't give a crap if some of their workers die of heat stroke. They figure they can just hire somebody else to replace them. No biggie, apparently.   

The Washington Post article starts out with an introduction to Sandra Ascencia, a South Florida plant nursery worker who once spent a week in the hospital from work-related heat stroke and once saw the body of a coworker in a parking lot, dead from heat stroke. 

WAPO continues: 

"Today, she belongs to a growing group of immigrant laborers in South Florida pushing for what for what many health experts say is the best way to prevent heatstroke as temperatures reach new extremes: A law requiring employers to provide outdoor workers with drinking water, shade and rest breaks on hot days."

Wait, what? Outdoor workers aren't entitled to drinking water, shade and rest breaks on hot days?

Ascencio goes on, as quoted in the Washington Post:

"'We're seeing temperatures above 100 degrees,' said Ascencio, 50. 'We meet workers who tell us bosses don't give them even 10 or 15 minute breaks. They know it's inhumane to work under these conditions but they have to pay their bills.'"

Ascencio is being Captain Obvious here, but you wouldn't know it from many industry leaders who say we shouldn't worry about heat stroke killing workers. My cynical side says some employers figure that workers, many of the POC and immigrants, are just cogs that are easily replaced, kind of like a part that breaks in a machine. To them, these workers aren't really human, so what's the big deal? 

Unless workplace safety rules are finally enacted, all this will keep getting worse. Climate change is making summers hotter and in many cases more humid. It is becoming more and more untenable to work in our worsening heat waves. 

The Washington Post says some states, like California and Washington, have enacted laws to protect workers from heat exposure. But in many other states, attempts to pass similar laws were killed or weakened by industry lobbyists. 

The Biden administration is also enacting rules to protect workers from excessive heat. At last check an OHSA vote on these rules has been delayed several times, so the fate is unknown. 

The rules are needed nationwide. An investigation by NPR and Columbia Journalism Investigations released in the summer of 2021 indicated 384 people in the U.S. died of work-related heat exposure in the last decade. 

This problem is bound to get worse without reforms, as a worsening climate crisis is intensifying and prolonging both extreme heat and humidity.

The reaction from several industries has been beyond callous regarding safety rules for heat. 

Here's some choice WAPO quotes on this, followed of course with my eye roll that can probably be seen from Neptune.

"Victoria Carreon, an administrator at the Nevada Department of Business and Industry, said the agency is in talks with industry groups about the burdens on businesses of having to implement regulations."

Yeah, like it's absolutely impossible for any business to provide enough water or workers and make sure they receive a break in a cool environment every once in awhile.  

Oh, and here's this gem from the National Cotton Council:

"The National Cotton Council wrote that many heat related issues are not caused by farm work or poor management 'but instead result from the modern employee lifestyle in an advanced 21st century global economy.' The group pinned workers' inability to withstand high temperatures on 'present day luxuries such as air conditioning and Americans' sendentary lifestyle.'"

Hear that kiddies? Cotton pickers aren't dying or getting dangerously sick from extreme heat. They're actually a bunch of wusses who are so completely lazy that they seek out air conditioning when they are off work and overheated. The selfishness of those cotton workers! They should be miserable 24/7!  Never mind that heat is dangerous to cotton pickers whether or not they have access to air conditioning during their off hours. 

In Oregon, trade groups for the timber and manufacturing interests are saying that heat rules would regulate "a societal hazard rather than an occupational hazard."

In other words, it's hot. Deal with it. Never mind that the workers in question would not willingly go out and kill themselves in the heat in their off hours. 

 In Virginia, Juley Fulcher, a worker health advocate for nonprofit Public Citizen said she was infuriated when one business representative told her, "If we give them breaks, it costs us money."

Fulcher said her reaction was "If you don't give them breaks, they die and that costs you money, too."

By the way, A United States farm worker is 35 times more likely to die from heat related problems that people toiling in other industries, according to Fast Company and Nexus News Media. Heat is also responsible for 170,000 heat related injuries. 

I'm guessing here that for many of these industries, this has nothing to do with ethics, morals, or humanity. To their minds, keeping employees alive in heat waves is more expensive than disposing of the dead ones and replacing them.  I'm being pretty blunt here, but that's what it seems to boil down to.  

Pretty demonic, but there you go. 

Of course, if we insist on talking just dollars and completely ignore humanity and morality, there is more that should be of interest to the billionaire overlords who want to rake in more dough. 

On NPR's Planet Money, they recently made a good case that workplace heat regulations would actually save industries money. 

David Metz a senior quantitative analyst at the RAND Corporation, laid it out for Planet Money. 

Metz crunched some numbers and concluded work place heat regulations in California would cost industry $100 million a year. Yeah, that is a lot of money but consider that California is a big state.

However, the same businesses that would lose that $100 million through regulation would also save $200 million, mostly through better worker productivity.  Which seems obvious. A worker who isn't about to keel over from the heat will probably do a better job.

As Planet Money explains, worker injuries increase when it's too hot. Decision making and cognition wilt in the heat too. 

So heat regulations in the workplace are a win-win, right?  Then why aren't employers embracing this idea?

Metz theorized businesses this cost/benefit ratio hasn't dawned on the Powers That Be because it just never crossed their minds. Metz charitable toward these managers with this assessment, but I'm a lot more skeptical.

The managers - the bad ones, anyway - never thought about this because they never wanted to. To them, who cares about employee safety?  They just want to make money. 

My whole screed here isn't an indictment of capitalism in general. It's a howl of disgust over the fact that many no longer regard capitalism as a system that at least has the potential to lift all boats. It's instead a game of which billionaire can vacuum up more cash and impoverish and exploit the greatest number of people.

We thought the last Gilded Age in the 1800s was bad enough. In some respects, the current one seems even worse. 

 

Tornadoes Highlight Workplace Safety, Or Lack Thereof, In Weather Emergencies

Remains of the candle factory in Mayfield, Kentucky 
after this month's tornado.  Was worker safety compromised
by managers not allowing employees to leave to 
find safer shelter?

Deaths at a candle factory in Mayfield Kentucky and at an Amazon warehouse in Edwardsville, Illinois during the big tornado outbreak earlier this month has put a spotlight on how workplaces deal with weather crises like tornadoes.  

Or not deal with them.  Worker safety during severe weather events seems not to be a priority. 

There' is admittedly s a lot of conflicting information and questions about how managers at the two devastated workplaces dealt with the oncoming disaster they faced on December 10.  It does seem like more could have been done to protect workers.  

At least eight people, possibly more, died during the tornado in the Mayfield Consumer Products factory. Six died when a tornado ripped apart the Amazon warehouse in Edwardsville.  There's also disturbing news of an Amazon delivery driver being ordered to continue her route despite tornado sirens going off around her, or she'd lose her job.

It became apparent at least a couple hours beforehand that Mayfield might be on trouble, given the path of a dangerous supercell and tornado originating in Arkansas. 

According to NBC News, workers were told they'd be fired if they left.

'"For hours, as word of the coming storm spread, as many as 15 workers beseeched managers to let them take shelter at their own homes, only to have their requests rebuffed, the worker said. Fearing for their safety, some left during their shifts regardless of the repercussions."

Around 5:30 p.m. that day, tornado warnings went off around Mayfield. That warning turned out to be a false alarm. But it prompted employees to request going home because of the growing threat of a large, new tornado later that night that would devastate the town and level the factory. 

You don't want to be out driving when a large tornado is nearby, of course. But had people left the factory an hour, two or even three hours before the tornado, they would have had time to access tornado shelters or basements, which are safer than large buildings with free standing roofs, like the candle factory. 

A spokesman for Mayfield Consumer Products has denied the employees' accusations, calling them "absolutely untrue."   Workers there are suing, so I'm sure more information will come out on this. 

In Edwardsville, the Amazon worker in a warehouse near the one that was hit by the tornado said a colleague in the hit warehouse had her phone with her.  That enabled the worker to receive the tornado warning. She said that allowed her to run for shelter. She would not have known the tornado was coming if not for the cell phone warning. 

Amazon, however, takes a dim view of employees having their cell phones with them. 

As NBC News reports: 

"Workers at two neighboring Amazon facilities in Edwardsville, just outside St. Louis, who were also in the path of the tornadoes overnight Friday, said they had little training in preparing for tornadoes and bristled at a company policy that multiple sources have said the company is trying to bring back Jan. 1, which would ban workers from having cellphones at work."

Many if not most people nowadays receive weather warnings via their smart phones. Banning cell phones would leave Amazon workers at the mercy of managers who might or might not hear tornado warnings, or not care enough if a tornado materializes.

NBC also said Amazon workers told them they are expected to work while there are tornado warnings, which is a big no-no. Especially in a building like a huge Amazon warehouse. 

These warehouses are huge and flimsy, without a lot of support beams to support the structures in the extreme winds associated with a tornado. The entire south half of the Edwardsville Amazon warehouse was shredded.

Tornado warnings for Edwardsville were issued at least 20 minutes before the tornado hit. However, Amazon managers either didn't take the warnings seriously, didn't know what to do with them, or more depressingly if true, prioritized production over worker safety.  

As The Intercept reports:

"....messages revealed a communication breakdown in which corporate failed to notify employees about the tornado even as it happened.  The Intercept quoted one employee who said, 'Corporate and IT were troubleshooting network outages and found out the building was hit by a tornado from the media.'"

In other words, if this report is true, the mucky mucks were much more concerned about production problems than dealing with the real danger - the tornado. 

The same day Mayfield was hit, this Edwardsville, Illinois
Amazon distribution center was hit by a tornado, 
killing six workers. Critics are saying that Amazon's
tornado and weather safety protocols are
severely lacking. 

This reading of Amazon managements' dismissive attitude toward employees in danger is also reflected in the tale of an Amazon delivery driver caught out in her truck in worsening weather as tornado sirens blared around her.

Bloomberg offered screen shots of text messages between the driver and managers. I know this is going to help make this post long, but you really need to read the exchanges to see how cavalier Amazon can be with worker safety.

Driver: "Tornado alarms are going off over here."

Dispatch: "Just keep delivering for now. We have to wait for word from Amazon. If we need to bring people back, the decision will ultimately be up to them. I will let you know if the situation changes at all. I'm talking with them now about it."

Driver: "How about for my own personal safety? I'm going to head back. Having alarms going off next to me and nothing but locked buildings around me isn't sheltering in place. That's wanting to turn this van into a casket. Hour left of delivery time. And if you look at the radar, the worst of the storm is going to be right on top of me in 30 minutes."

Dispatch: "If you decided to come back, that choice is yours. But I can tell you it won't be viewed as for your own safety.The safest practice is to stay exactly where you are. If you decide to return with your packages, it will be viewed as you refusing your route, which will ultimately end with you not having a job tomorrow. The sirens are just a warning."

The things the dispatcher said are absolutely astounding. "Sheltering" in a delivery van on a street during a tornado is pretty much the most dangerous thing a person could do.  Flying debris would be a mortal danger to anyone in a van. 

"The sirens are just a warning." ' Well, duh!!!! The sirens are a warning that a tornado is approaching. So they should be disregarded?  And saying that taking basic tornado safety will cost the driver her jo is absolutely beyond the pale. 

What should have happened is the managers should have directed the driver to at least return to the warehouse to go into hopefully a safe room. Even better, the driver should have been instructed to stop, seek a business or home in a well constructed building, and go into a tornado shelter, a basement, or a windowless, interior ground floor room.  I know the driver said there were a lot of locked buildings, but she could have found a safe refuge if she started looking at the moment the tornado sirens went off.

You can see this "profits before people" ethos in other weather safety incidents involving Amazon. Says The Intercept:

In one case earlier this year, an Amazon contractor in southern Illinois sent a letter to Amazon requesting several hours off his shift in preparation for Hurricane Ida. An Amazon seller support manager replied that the contractor's performance would suffer.

'It's important to confirm the shipment of orders by the expected date so that customers can see the status of their shipped orders online,' the manager told the contractor. 'Orders that are ship confirmed late may lead to increased negative claims, negative feedback and/or customer contacts and negatively impact customer."

Amazon's bungling or worse of tornado safety is just more evidence that the behemoth company's culture is to dismiss worker safety.  There's been scandals on high rates of worker injury, inadequate bathroom breaks and lame Covid protocols. 

And heat stroke, to get back to weather hazards. Like during the unprecedented heat wave last June in the Pacific Northwest. 

Gizmodo, quoting the Seattle Times, said "workers at the company's Kent, Washington facility endured near 90 degree heat while some stations pushed employees to work at maximum speed in the unprecedented weather for so-called 'power hours.'

There have been several other complaints of heat, causing worker illness and even deaths at Amazon facilities in Chicago, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Pennsylvania. 

For all the above reasons, I don't do business with Amazon.  I buy my goods directly from retailers and suppliers.

Of course, just one person - me - doesn't make a huge difference and Amazon remains hugely popular with consumers. 

Amazon and other online retailers have "trained" consumers to expect their shipments to arrive at the drop of a hat. I work in customer service for an online retailer, and there is a thankfully small subset of "Karens" who don't give a whit if there's an excellent reason why their order is late, even if that reason is because of a collapsed warehouse or worker deaths. 

Most of us are quite willing to have our packages slightly delayed if it means the driver remains safe from harm. Unfortunately, a minority of consumers think it's worth it for people to die to ensure the tchotchkes they ordered arrive instantaneously.  (These are the same people who protest loudly when a TV station interrupts some dumb show like "The Bachelorette to broadcast tornado warnings).

Social media sites like Twitter and Reddit are rife with stories of bosses and corporations demanding employees show up to work in dangerous weather conditions. 

That has to change. I can see a boss being miffed if an employee won't drive to work in a light snowfall in a northern climate. But it's time to rain hell on employers who insist workers risk their lives in hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, ice storms and other hazardous weather just to raise the bottom line by a few pennies.

This shouldn't be a new Gilded Age. This shouldn't be dystopia. Any employer who risks workers' lives for any reason, including dangerous storms, need to suffer some gawd-awful consequences.