5.5 Summary
As noted at the beginning of the chapter, the health risks from fracking affect both workers at the well sites and nearby residents. This example demonstrates that when it comes to chemical and biological hazards there is no clear boundary between occupational health and safety and public health or between workplace hazards and environmental hazards. In this way, biological and chemical hazards can be pervasive and difficult to recognize because exposure occurs in multiple settings.
Chemical and biological hazards are also challenging because of the level of complexity involved in their interactions with the human body. It is much harder to ascertain the risk associated with using a cleaning agent than the risk posed by working on a roof or operating an espresso maker. Health effects may only develop from prolonged exposure, or the disease may have a long latency period. Often, pinpointing the cause of a disease can also be difficult due to exposure to multiple hazards, a lack of knowledge about what we are exposed to in the workplace, and the lack of a clear boundary between work-related and environmental exposures.
As a result, this area of OHS relies heavily on science to understand the effects of chemical and biological hazards. Nevertheless, the nature of scientific practices often result in overly conservative conclusions when assessing the risk these hazards pose to workers. Issues with such scientific conventions can be compounded by employers’ long-standing efforts to deny the existence of chemical and biological hazards and avoid taking action to control them. As a result, there is strong evidence suggesting that current protections are inadequate and systematically under-protective of workers. Even if the precautionary principle is not a legal requirement in Canadian workplaces, this dynamic makes a strong argument for adopting the principle for moral reasons when it comes to chemical and biological hazards.
Discussion Questions
- How do chemical hazards harm workers?
- What chemical hazards have you encountered in the workplace? What were the route(s) of entry of those hazards? What acute and chronic effects did they have?
- Why might we be skeptical about the utility of OELs?
- What biological hazards have you encountered in the workplace? What were the route(s) of entry of those hazards? What acute and chronic effects did they have?
- Do you think scientists are too conservative when they assess whether certain substances are hazardous to workers? Why or why not?
Exercises
1. Go online and find information about black mould. Specifically, try to determine:
- How can black mould be recognized?
- What health effects does black mould cause? And what is the route(s) of entry for black mould?
- What controls are effective for working near black mould? And how can it be eliminated from the workplace?
2. Go back online and find out what regulations regarding black mould and its remediation operate in your jurisdiction. You will want to consider occupational health and safety rules, as well as environmental regulations and building codes. Now consider the following scenario.
- Pretend you are an employer operating a building cleaning company. One of your employees has reported finding black mould in the basement of a building you require the employee to regularly clean.
- Using your knowledge of black mould, write a 500-word plan to respond to the employee’s concerns given the rules governing mould in your jurisdiction and the health effects of mould exposure for workers.
3. If possible, swap plans with another student. If this is not possible, use your own plan. Pretend you are the employee who has received this plan in response to your concerns about black mould in the workplace. What concerns do you have about your employer’s plan? And how would you use your occupational health and safety rights to seek remedy for these concerns?
