Organizing the Breathless: Cotton Dust, Southern Politics, and the Brown Lung Association by Robert E Botsch

Author:Robert E Botsch [Botsch, Robert E]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Labor & Industrial Relations, United States, 20th Century, Political Science, State & Local, South (AL; AR; FL; GA; KY; LA; MS; NC; SC; TN; VA; WV), History
ISBN: 9780813151366
Google: UeUzEAAAQBAJ
Goodreads: 22618639
Publisher: University Press of Kentucky
Published: 2014-07-15T00:00:00+00:00

ENFORCEMENT OF THE DUST STANDARDS

Another way the Brown Lung Association employed institutional disruption was in its encouragement of strict enforcement of workplace regulations in the mills. Though members themselves had no access to the workplace, OSHA inspectors did. To the extent that the group could induce inspections, and to the extent that inspections disrupted normal work patterns, the Brown Lung Association could make its presence felt indirectly.

The organization utilized several tactics in this regard. They vocally criticized state OSHA programs for not inspecting properly or frequently, and they filed complaints with the national OSHA. For example, in March of 1980 the association filed a formal complaint that South Carolina OSHA did not have enough inspectors. Federal OSHA officials agreed with the complaint and ordered the South Carolina Department of Labor to increase the size of its program and perform more inspections (BLA Papers). By hiring a lawyer to help with processing violations and by performing more inspections, the South Carolina OSHA program did avoid a federal takeover (Covington and Dennis 1980, 7), despite continuing complaints from Brown Lung Association members.

Using inspection problems as a basis for complaint, members met with the governor and testified at legislative hearings in an unsuccessful attempt to prevent the renomination and confirmation of the South Carolina commissioner of labor, Edgar McGowan. His strongest support came from the textile manufacturers, who describe him as unusually fair, understanding of the industry perspective, and not as pro-labor as other labor commissioners (Interviews).

As part of their efforts to educate active workers, Brown Lung Association organizers and members encouraged those in the mills to call for inspections. Their leaflets explained workers’ rights to do so without identifying themselves to management, buy they had very little success in persuading active workers to complain (Interviews; BLA Papers). Charlotte Brody (1991) thinks the major explanation for this failure was that the association really could not protect workers from employer retaliation, despite the protections that were written into the regulations. The organizers knew that. So did the workers. Even state OSHA officials were aware of this problem. They candidly admit that they can offer little protection to workers who are fired after making a complaint, because the company is almost always able to show that the dismissal is unrelated to the complaint (“Job Fear” 1992).

State OSHA inspections left much to be desired. The Charlotte Observer series that ran in February 1980 was extremely critical of state enforcement of OSHA regulations (Covington and Dennis 1980, 6-7). The newspaper’s examination of state records found that only 297 of the 614 mills in both Carolinas had been inspected, that both states had allowed mills two or more years to end violations, that regulators failed to reinspect or took the mill’s word that remedial action had been taken, and that officials had consistently levied minimal fines. 3

The response of those in charge of state-run OSHA programs was twofold. First, they blamed the feds. Labor Commissioner Edgar McGowan complained that federal officials were constantly changing their view on what

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.