IBM put gag on medics

[Guest guest]

IBM put gag on medics Ex-nurse testifies company tried to avoid illness blame Alan Gathright, Chronicle Staff WriterThursday, November 20, 2003 ©2003 San Francisco Chronicle | Feedback

URL: sfgate.com/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/11/20/BUGDK364RQ1.DTL

A former IBM occupational nurse testified Wednesday that a manager ordered medical staff never to say workers' ailments were caused by toxic chemicals, and instead to blame symptoms on allergies, alcohol or fatty foods to avoid workers' compensation claims. The testimony at the IBM toxics trial in Santa Clara appeared to reinforce claims by ex-workers Alida and Jim that the computer giant created a hazardous workplace that caused them to develop cancer. In the lawsuit, which is being closely watched by the high-tech industry, the two plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages. While IBM maintains it looked out for worker safety, testimony by two former IBM managers Wednesday portrayed Big Blue as a secretive company where management strived to keep employees in the dark about risks of toxic exposure in the workplace. Both witnesses testified separately that management had a policy of not disclosing medical chart notations with workers or discussing the dangers posed by toxic solvents used in disk-drive manufacturing because it might trigger mass hysteria that would shut down production. IBM attorneys maintain that there is no scientific evidence that the San workplace sickened employees, and medical experts agree it will be a challenge to conclusively link people suffering from different types of cancer to an industrial cause. After Wednesday's session, IBM attorney Weber said allegations that the company concealed health risks "will not withstand scrutiny. The testimony that you heard today is contradicted by the record, by the documents and by the facts.'' The courtroom battle may be the first of many involving 40 former IBM workers who have filed suits against the company for allegedly creating a dangerous workplace environment in a San facility. Audrey Crouch, the IBM occupational nurse who rose to become an environmental safety manager, said it was an unwritten policy that when workers displayed symptoms that could be early signs of chemical exposure, ranging from nasal discharge and dizziness to elevated liver toxicity, company nurses were supposed to quiz employees about "alternative lifestyle" causes such as allergies and consumption of alcohol and fatty foods. Nurses were instructed to ask workers about nonwork causes, "everything but where they worked and what type of chemicals they had (used),'' said Crouch, who now heads emergency medical service training for San Fire Department paramedics and firefighters. Managers, Crouch testified, "did not want to have any workers' comp illness (claims).'' When , the attorney for the cancer-stricken former workers, asked if Crouch had ever documented possible chemical exposure symptoms on a diagnostic punch card for industrial illness or injury, she replied no. "Because I would have been terminated,'' Crouch said. The nurse added that she was reprimanded by her nursing manager, Kathy Gonsalves, on about three occasions when she tried to overrule production supervisors and send home a sick worker who she believed suffered from chemical poisoning. Crouch testified that when the assembly line supervisor complained to the nursing supervisor, Gonsalves rebuked Crouch for intervening, telling her: "That was not my job. I was supposed to call industrial hygiene'' about suspected chemical exposure. Crouch also said nurses were ordered not to reveal diagnoses to ailing workers because managers didn't want employees to talk with co-workers about their conditions "just in case someone else had the same sickness.'' The policy "was to prevent mass hysteria,'' Crouch said. "They didn't want everyone to claim being sick of the same thing and close the production line.'' Her account echoed former IBM manager Arthur , who testified earlier in the day that managers were instructed to avoid discussing the signs and symptoms of chemical poisoning at employee meetings to avoid spurring mass hysteria. On Tuesday, testified that Big Blue had a policy to essentially deny that workers faced any danger from being exposed to chemicals used in manufacturing. Asked about the mass hysteria testimony after the trial, Weber, the IBM attorney, said "it sounded awfully rehearsed to have two witnesses come in and use the same term.'' "The breadth of these conspiracy theories you just heard are far beyond what Oliver Stone could dream up in even his most fevered imagination,'' Weber added, referring to the film director's reputation for wildly sinister cinematic plots. But , the ex-workers' attorney, countered that Crouch and have never encountered each other. IBM attorneys are expected to cross-examine Crouch today. E-mail Alan Gathright at agathright@....