An information resource for serving & former members of the Irish Army Air Corps suffering illness due to unprotected toxic chemical exposure in the workplace.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
29. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if a Commission of Investigation into serious allegations of an ineffective or non existent health and safety regime in the Air Corps will be established in view of the fact that a person (details supplied) stated in their report that the allegations made by the three whistle blowers could not be adequately dealt with in the type of informal review they were tasked with carrying out. [44083/17]
28. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the action he plans to take on foot of the recent review (details supplied) of Air Corps whistle-blower claims; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44189/17]
The review shall encompass a review of all relevant documents held by the Department and the Defence Forces, any additional material as may be supplied or received by the Reviewer, and interviews of such persons as considered appropriate by the Reviewer.
The Reviewer will:
Review the allegations as detailed in the written correspondence to the Minister and determine if –
In the period covered by the disclosure, did the Air Corps comply with relevant Health and Safety standards with regard to the safe use of toxic chemicals and if not what action has been taken in the intervening period to ensure compliance.
In relation the disclosure, provide considered views and observations in relation to the allegations set out.
Provide such other considered views and observations as are considered necessary.
The Reviewer shall be provided with access to all available documentation relevant to the events and any other documentation requested by the Reviewer.
The Reviewer shall be provided with the names of all relevant persons, including serving or retired members of the Defence Forces, or other persons the Reviewer considers appropriate. The Reviewer shall endeavour to interview or take statements from all relevant persons.
The Department of Defence and the Defence Forces shall each appoint a liaison officer to provide the necessary information required in order to conduct the review and to assist the Reviewer in identifying the relevant persons to be interviewed.
The review shall be submitted to the Minister with Responsibility for Defence by the Reviewer.
*****
Please click on the link below to open the report on the Department of Defence website.
The objective of this Directive is to protect the health and safety of women in the workplace when pregnant or after they have recently given birth and women who are breastfeeding.
Contents
Under the Directive, a set of guidelines detail the assessment of the chemical, physical and biological agents and industrial processes considered dangerous for the health and safety of pregnant women or women who have just given birth and are breast feeding.
The Directive also includes provisions for physical movements and postures, mental and physical fatigue and other types of physical and mental stress.
Pregnant and breastfeeding workers may under no circumstances be obliged to perform duties for which the assessment has revealed a risk of exposure to agents, which would jeopardize their safety or health. Those agents and working conditions are defined in Annex II of the Directive.
Member States shall ensure that pregnant workers are not obliged to work in night shifts when medically indicated (subject to submission of a medical certificate).
Employers or the health and safety service will use these guidelines as a basis for a risk evaluation for all activities that pregnant or breast feeding workers may undergo and must decide what measures should be taken to avoid these risks. Workers should be notified of the results and of measures to be taken which can be adjustment of working conditions, transfer to another job or granting of leave.
The Directive grants maternity leave for the duration of 14 weeks of which 2 weeks must occur before birth.
Women must not be dismissed from work because of their pregnancy and maternity for the period from the beginning of their pregnancy to the end of the period of leave from work.
Annex I – Non exhaustive list of agents and working conditions referred to in Art.4 of the directive (assessment and information)
A. Agents
1. Physical agents where these are regarded as agents causing foetal lesions and/or likely to disrupt placental attachment, and in particular:
(a) shocks, vibration or movement;
(b) handling of loads entailing risks, particularly of a dorsolumbar nature;
(c) noise;
(d) ionizing radiation (*);
(e) non-ionizing radiation;
(f) extremes of cold or heat;
(g) movements and postures, travelling – either inside or outside the establishment – mental and physical fatigue and other physical burdens connected with the activity of the worker within the meaning of Article 2 of the Directive.
2. Biological agents
Biological agents of risk groups 2, 3 and 3 within the meaning of Article 2 (d) numbers 2, 3 and 4 of Directive 90/679/EEC (¹), in so far as it is known that these agents or the therapeutic measures necessitated by such agents endanger the health of pregnant women and the unborn child and in so far as they do not yet appear in Annex II.
3. Chemical agents
The following chemical agents in so far as it is known that they endanger the health of pregnant women and the unborn child and in so far as they do not yet appear in Annex II:
(a) substances labelled R40 (limited evidence of a carcinogenic effect), R45 (May cause cancer), R46 (May cause inheritable genetic damage), and R47 (May cause birth defects) under Dangerous Substances Directive (67/548/EEC) in so far as they do not yet appear in Annex II;
(b) chemical agents in Annex I to Directive 90/394/EEC (Protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to carcinogens) ;
(c) mercury and mercury derivatives;
(d) antimitotic drugs;
(e) carbon monoxide;
(f) chemical agents of known and dangerous percutaneous absorption.
B. Processes
Industrial processes listed in Annex I to Directive 90/394/EEC.
C. Working conditions
Underground mining work.
Annex II – Non exhaustive list of agents and working conditions referred to in Art.6 of the directive (cases in which exposure is prohibited)
A. Pregnant workers within the meaning of Article 2 (a)
1. Agents
(a) Physical agents
Work in hyperbaric atmosphere, e.g. pressurized enclosures and underwater diving.
(b) Biological agents
The following biological agents:
– toxoplasma,
– rubella virus,
unless the pregnant workers are proved to be adequately protected against such agents by immunization.
(c) Chemical agents
Lead and lead derivatives in so far as these agents are capable of being absorbed by the human organism.
2. Working conditions
Underground mining work.
B. Workers who are breastfeeding within the meaning of Article 2 (c)
1. Agents
(a) Chemical agents
Lead and lead derivatives in so far as these agents are capable of being absorbed by the human organism.
The Irish Army Air Corps only started carrying out “adequate” risk assessments in the past year so for 25 years pregnant females at Baldonnel were dangerously exposed to Carcinogens, Mutagens & Teratogens.
Any pregnant females working in proximity to running aircraft or aircraft being refueled, such as in the ramp area, or downwind of the ramp were exposed.
Exhaust gasses contain Carbon Monoxide as well as TetraEthyl Lead and other hydrocarbon fumes.
Fuel System Anti Icing additives used by the Irish Army Air Corps included 2-(2-methoxyethoxy)ethanol which is a known to cause reproductive and developmental toxic effects.
Furthermore pregnant females working in or entering into Avionics, ERF or Engineering Wing hangar were being exposed to further known Carcinogens, Mutagens and Teratogens including Dichloromethane, Isocyanates & Trichloroethylene to name but a few.
Due to the fact that the working dress & overalls of technicians were (and still are) brought home to be washed in domestic family washing machines it is extremely likely that pregnant spouses & partners of Air Corps personnel were also affected.
This may have lead to miscarriages, stillbirths, lifelong genetic diseases & developmental conditions such as autism in the children of personnel.
Directive 94/33/EC – Protection of Young people at work
Introduced 22nd June 1994
Objective
The aim of this Directive is to lay down minimum requirements for the protection of young people at work.
Definitions
The directive gives legal definitions for the terms “child”, “adolescent”, “young person”, “light work”, “working time” and “rest period”.
Contents
Member States shall take the necessary measures to prohibit work by children. They shall ensure, under the conditions laid down by this Directive, that the minimum working or employment age is not lower than the minimum age at which compulsory full-time schooling – as imposed by national law – ends or 15 years in any event.
This Directive shall apply to any person under 18 years of age having an employment contract or an employment relationship defined by the law in force in a Member State and/or governed by the law in force in a Member State. Exceptions can be adopted by Member States for occasional work or short-term work, involving domestic service in a private household or work regarded as not being harmful, damaging or dangerous to young people in a family undertaking.
The Directive defines “young people” as people under the age of 18 and “children” as young people under the age of 15 or who are still in full-time compulsory education in accordance with national legislation. Adolescents are young people between the ages of 15 and 18 who are no longer in full-time compulsory education in accordance with national legislation.
Member States may make legislative exceptions for the prohibition of work by children not to apply to children employed for the purposes of cultural, artistic, sporting or advertising activities, subject to prior authorisation by the competent authority in each specific case; to children of at least 14 years of age working under a combined work/training scheme or an in-plant work-experience scheme, provided that such work is done in accordance with the conditions laid down by the competent authority; and to children of at least 14 years of age performing light work. Light work can also be performed by children of 13 years of age for a limited number of hours per week in the case of categories of work determined by national legislation.
‘Light work’, as defined in the Directive, shall mean all work which, on account of the inherent nature of the tasks which it involves and the particular conditions under which they are performed is not likely to be harmful to the safety, health or development of children, and is not such as to be harmful to their attendance at school, their participation in vocational guidance or training programmes approved by the competent authority or their capacity to benefit from the instruction received.
Employers shall adopt the measures necessary to protect the safety and health of young people, taking particular account of the specific risks which are a consequence of their lack of experience, of absence of awareness of existing or potential risks or of the fact that young people have not yet fully matured. Employers shall implement such measures on the basis of a comprehensive assessment of the hazards to young people in connection with their work according to Art 6/2 of the Directive. The assessment must be made before young people begin work and when there is any major change in working conditions.
The employer shall inform young people and their representatives of possible risks and of all measures adopted concerning their safety and health.
Member States shall prohibit the employment of young people for:
work which is objectively beyond their physical or psychological capacity;
work involving harmful exposure to agents which are toxic, carcinogenic, cause heritable genetic damage, or harm to the unborn child or which in any other way chronically affect human health;
work involving harmful exposure to radiation;
work involving the risk of accidents which it may be assumed cannot be recognised or avoided by young persons owing to their insufficient attention to safety or lack of experience or training;
or work in which there is a risk to health from extreme cold or heat, or from noise or vibration.
In addition, the Directive contains provisions relating to working hours, night work, rest periods, annual leave and rest breaks.
Each Member State is responsible for defining the necessary measures applicable in the event of infringement of the provisions of this Directive; these measures must be effective and proportionate to the offence.
It appears the Air Corps failed this directive as soon as young people (apprentices) set foot inside the gates of Casement Aerodrome. At the of time this European Commission directive was issued crumbling asbestos on central heating pipework was present in all 4 landings of the old hostel apprentice accommodation. In fact in previous years apprentices were ordered to carry out asbestos removal without any training, PPE or health surveillance.
Please also note that on the 11th of September 2017 the HSA wrote to the Irish Army Air Corps requesting….
It should be confirmed that the findings of Asbestos Surveys for relevant buildings at the facility, or the corresponding Registers of Asbestos-Containing Materials {ACMs), have been brought to the attention of building managers and/or incorporated into the building management system. You are referred to relevant HSA published guidance – Practical Guidelines on ACM Management and Abatement, Section 7.
We have just added links to Safety Data Sheets which show the constituent chemicals for AVGAS (100LL) as well as AVTUR (Jet A-1) on our Chemical Product Names & Safety Data Sheets page.
On the 26th of January 2016 the current head of Health & Safety in the Irish Army Air Corps stated in an email to the Medical Corps that “The Formation Safety & Unit Safety Personnel have reviewed refuelling work practices and believe that the risk of exposure is low.”
The Government is facing calls to establish a Commission of Investigation into whistleblower claims against the Air Corps, after the terms of an independent report into the allegations were branded ‘farcical’ by Fianna Fáil leader Micheál Martin.
The Air Corps stands accused of failing to protect its technicians from the effects of cancer-causing chemicals, with whistleblowers claiming that decades of neglect has had a devastating effect on the health of members of the Defence Forces.
Yesterday, the Irish Examiner revealed that Christopher O’Toole, the author of an independent review of the allegations, said the terms of reference he was given for this probe were “impractical”, and that elements of the allegations made were issues outside his expertise.
Mr O’Toole also found that records demonstrating the Air Corps’ compliance with health and safety regulations “are not readily available”.
Whistleblowers had previously alleged that inspection records dating back to the 1990s were deliberately destroyed because they had raised concerns, but both the Government and the Defence Forces deny the claim, and say the reports in question were mislaid over time.
Mr Martin said he believes a Commission of Investigation is necessary: “The situation is far from satisfactory because with his opening comments the report’s author is essentially saying he cannot fulfill the terms of reference. From the Government’s point of view they established this review, they must have known the terms of reference could not be fulfilled. It’s farcical.”
“It seems to me there are no records of compliance with health regulations, which is very, very serious because in their absence one has to conclude that the probability is they were not complied with.
Read full article on Irish Examiner website below…
Sinn Féin Defence Spokesperson Aengus Ó Snodaigh TD has said the government must now initiate a comprehensive investigation into health and safety procedures at Casement Aerodrome and that its terms of reference must be broad enough to ensure it is able to examine the serious allegations made by serving and retired members’ of the Defence Forces.
“It is now time for the Government to act in the best interests of the Defence Forces and carry out a full review of health and safety protocols at Casement Aerodrome over the last three decades, which must be thorough, transparent and with terms of reference that allow for an in-depth examination of how chemicals and other toxic materials were managed.”
“It must also include the inclusion of oral testimonies from past and present personnel who served there and an independent assessment of their health and general well-being to ascertain if they have suffered as a result of their service at the base.
Please read the press release in full on the Sinn Féin website.
It should be pointed out that the state already has in its possession the “Chemical Exposure Report 1994-2005” which includes a review of chemical management as well as oral testimonies from serving personnel. This report actually predates the whistle-blower allegations and was created in 2014.
Unfortunately the report was carried out for the State Claims Agency with a view to fighting affected personnel in the High Court, rather than help ill serving & former personnel.
Even though “Chemical Exposure Report 1994-2005” has the potential to save lives, Minister Paul Kehoe refused to waive privilege or release the review when asked by Aengus Ó Snodaigh in a recent Parliamentary Question.
It happens in the best of homes; stuff — invoices, receipts, notes, cards and letters put by because one day they might be needed — gets lost, inadvertently destroyed or just misplaced. It’s part of the rich and familiar tapestry of domestic life. It should not happen in public organisations and authorities that spend large sums of taxpayers’ money on filing and recording systems and on the people who are supposed to run them.
But that appears to be only one of the serious issues highlighted today in our report on the independent review of claims by former Air Corps staff who say their exposure to toxic chemicals from the late 1980s to the early 2000s caused chronic illnesses. Another seems to be that the review — established by the Defence department — was itself not fit for purpose.
The review — by a retired civil servant — was charged with examining the allegations made by Air Corps workers whose claim was that the State failed to give them adequate training and protection … a fairly straightforward mission, then. No, not at all; it has been a waste of time, and for that no fault at all attaches to the retired civil servant, Christopher O’Toole. His only error, perhaps, was to accept the toxic commission at the outset.
Those are, sadly, very general terms because, as he goes on to explain, “a problem has arisen in relation to the issues raised by the informants because appropriate records to demonstrate compliance are not readily available … In the absence of such records, proof of compliance is problematic and establishing the actual situation at the time in question would be a complex task requiring the gathering of evidence and probably taking oral testimony; in effect a forensic exercise which it is not possible for me to carry out.”
The review tells those most affected — and that could be a great many Air Corps employees — and the wider public nothing about the facts at the heart of this case, leaving us still with questions about the “appropriate records” that are not available. What is necessary now is a second review, led by an independent chemicals expert — perhaps from Scotland or Wales — who can establish once and for all what happened, or didn’t happen, at Casement Aerodrome.
Read full article on Irish Examiner website below…
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
QUESTION NO: 234
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if chemical health and safety training is provided to new recruits and cadets as part of their basic training; and if not, if it will be made mandatory as soon as possible. [42131/17]
Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
I am advised by the relevant military authorities that basic Health and Safety training is provided to all new entrants to the Defence Forces. Where a requirement for more specific Health and Safety training is identified for an individual or group of individuals for their post, this training is provided by qualified Defence Force safety personnel. For example individuals working with chemicals will receive Chemical Awareness training as required.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)