Laboratory Standard

The OSHA General Duty requires employers to provide their employees with a workplace free from recognized hazards likely to cause death or serious physical harm.  The “Laboratory Standard” was created by OSHA to ensure a safe work environment in laboratories, and  to ensure the correct handling of small amounts of hazardous materials.  OSHA created this standard in 1990 and it is known as 29 CFR 1910.1450.  The laboratory standard is meant to target the relatively small amounts of hazardous chemicals used in a non-production biased.  However the standard does not apply to all laboratories.  It mainly only affects laboratories that conduct research and development.  For example, the standard does not pertain to laboratories that perform tasks like quality assurance.  These labs usually are conducting repetitive procedures to ensure product reliability.  The standard aims to ensure workers know the danger of the hazardous materials they are working with.  The standard makes sure that worker exposure to chemicals being handled or used does not exceed existing OEL’s/PEL’s.   Laboratories under this standard are required to have a Chemical Hygiene Plan in existence as well.  The Chemical Hygiene Plan lists the procedures and equipment used when working in an environment were hazardous chemicals are present. 

Workers should be informed and trained when using potentially harmful substance.  Materials known to be hazardous must be identified as such.  There should also be a system of record keeping pertaining to hazardous chemical use in the lab.  When using chemicals that stand as a respiratory risk, employees must use proper respiratory protection.  All employees should also be informed on the locations of SDS (safety data sheets).  Eye protection should always be used in a laboratory.  Very unsuspecting dangers are everywhere in a lab and goggles are often removed to improve comfort.  The only way to insure constant eye protection is to always wear your eye protection.   Lab coats should also be used in a lab environment all the time.  The lab coat puts a barrier between you and a spill or any other hazard, and can prevent some adverse health risks.  Proper closed toe footwear is also a must have in the lab.  This means no flip-flops or sandals. While a lab coat and eye protection are the basic personal protective equipment(PPE) in the lab, they are not the only PPE’s that may be required.  Additional personal protective equipment may be required as well such as gloves, respirators, splash shields, etc.   Different types of labs will require different types of safety equipment, and will have different was to use them.  This is why it is so important for employees to be educated on the chemicals and equipment they are using.  Most accidents in the lab are do to lack of training or proper education.   Training must include the following.  Methods of observation used to detect the presence or release of a hazardous chemical.  Knowledge of a physical or health hazards of chemicals in the laboratory work area.  Knowledge of the measures a worker must take to prevent themselves from injury.  Useful details in the workers chemical hygiene plan.  And finally keeping up to date on retraining if need be.

Ethics

Ethics often plays a crucial role in the business world.  In this case we are talking about DuPont and the C8 issues in Parkersburg.  There are six types of ethics we talked about in class that pertain to this issue.  These include personal, community, professional, corporate, federal, and state ethics.  Ethics are defined as how a person, group, or organization makes moral judgments concerning what’s right and what’s wrong.   In this article we are going to talk specifically about professional ethics concerning the DuPont case.  DuPont is one of the worlds biggest chemical company’s; it was founded as a black powder manufacturer in 1802.  DuPont has a large factory is Parkersburg West Virginia.

The town of Parkersburg heavily depends on this factory to employee its citizens.  It is almost certain that everyone who lives in Parkersburg either works at DuPont, or knows multiple other people who do.  Because of the service that DuPont provides the town, many of the people who live there are very loyal to the company.  So when farmer Wilbur Tennant brought to attention that his cows were dying left and right, and blamed DuPont for it, the town turned against him.  DuPont had been releasing a chemical into a stream that ran threw Wilbur Tennant’s farm.  This chemical is referred to as C8 and is used in manufacturing of Teflon.  

The chemical was actually developed by 3M, and they were sure to warn DuPont of its dangers to human health.   Regardless of the well-known health effects on humans and animals, the C8 contamination was largely ignored.  While all 6 types of ethics listed earlier pertain to this case, we are going to focus on professional ethics.   The Tennant’s wanted veterinarians to look at their sick and dying cattle. 

Long story short, the veterinarians found poor husbandry to be the cause of death.  In other words, they were telling this family of life long cattlemen, they didn’t know how to take care of their cows.  The vets knew there was something wrong with the cows, and they also knew DuPont was to blame.  These people exhibited very poor professional ethics, oppose to doing the write thing they lied and kept the real cause of sickness undisclosed.  The Tennants had to find a veterinarian far away from Parkersburg to actually get the proof they were after.  But its not just cows that were treated this way; people were denied medical attention as well.  When a person would go to the nearby hospital claiming medical complications due to C8, not only would the medical staff not examine them, they wouldn’t even talk to them.  Again, this is a perfect example of an absolute abomination of professional ethics.   Out of all the industries, the medical industry should be the one that withholds the highest ethical standards.  However, pressure from DuPont pushed professionals to constantly wrong the Tennants, and people of Parkersburg suffering from medical issues.  Many professionals actually work under an ethical code, and breaking this code is actually the same as breaking the law.  DuPont employees also demonstrated very poor professional ethics.  They knew the chemical to be dangerous.  So why was it openly disposed into our waterways?  Why were employees being exposed to it even though it was causing their children to have birth defects?  All these professionals demonstrated very poor professional ethics.