pesticide victim wins workers comp case

[Guest guest]

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/local/sfl-zsugar07jun07.story?coll=

>

Ex-sugar worker harmed by pesticides wins disability ruling

By Joan Fleischer Tamen Business Writer

June 7, 2002

In a case likely to set new standards in defining occupational hazards,

the Florida Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that exposure to pesticides ove

r a lifetime career with U.S. Sugar Corp. has left a mechanic permanently

disabled. The state's highest court affirmed lower court rulings in the case

involving G.J. Henson, 58, of Clewiston, who is paralyzed and requires

a ventilator but has not been receiving payments while the case has been

on appeal.

>

Henson worked for U.S. Sugar as an agricultural mechanic for 28 years,

until 1996 when court documents say he became disabled. His job was to

repair broken equipment and he spent most days in the sugar fields, where

five machines simultaneously sprayed pesticides that included ametryn,

atrazine, dursban and other chemicals.

In repairing those machines, Henson took them apart and got pesticides

on his hands and clothes. He said company-issued leather gloves were

cumbersome and latex gloves ripped on the equipment. He also claimed in

his original worker's compensation lawsuit that he was told that the pestic

ides would not harm him, and he was not given any training on safety precaut

ions for handling the chemicals. He also said he had no access to soap or wa=

shfacilities in the field.

>

He went to the sugar giant's health clinic from 1977 to 1996 with

complaints of shortness of breath, nausea and muscle weakness.

In 1996, his doctor referred him to a pulmonologist. Henson suffered

numerous severe respiratory illnesses and was near death several times,

according to court documents. He was treated with steroids and, as a

result, developed diabetes. Henson is confined to a wheelchair and

dependent upon a ventilator.

" I called him this morning with the court's decision, and we are all

ecstatic, " said Henson's attorney Nina Sachs of West Palm Beach. " This =

has been a four-year legal battle. The company has been obstinate all the way.

I hope it's now over. Mr. Henson has been waiting a long time for his

worker's compensation. "

>

Attempts to reach attorneys for U.S. Sugar were unsuccessful.

Henson applied for workers' compensation benefits in 1997 and a judge

determined that he was permanently and totally disabled, and that his

disability was caused by pesticide exposure in the workplace.

But lawyers for U.S. Sugar and other groups on their behalf had argued that

there was no general acceptance in the scientific community that pesticide

exposure can cause the nerve damage that Henson's doctors say he suffers

from peripheral neuropathy. They questioned how the scientific evidence=

had been presented, and asked the court to order a more stringent rule of

evidence, called the Frye standard, in all worker's compensation cases.It

is the standard used before scientific evidence can be admitted into co=

urt, requiring that it be generally accepted in the scientific community.

In Thursday's decision, the Florida Supreme Court agreed. But in applying

the new standard, the court found Henson had still proved his case.

But the new standard could make it more difficult for other workers. " We

won our aim to install the Frye test in the workers compensation arena, as

it is in criminal and civil law, to keep out junk science, " said West Palm

Beach attorney Kagan, who filed briefs on behalf of a group that

included the Florida Fruit & Vegetable Association, American Chemistry

Council, Florida Fertilizer & Agrichemical Association.

" The Frye test must be performed to ensure the trustworthiness of novel

scientific theories, " the court said in its decision. " In the vast majority

of cases, no Frye inquiry will be required because no innovative scientific

theories will be at issue. "

>