Sunday, March 30, 1997
Asbestos work – it’s a dangerous job
Justice in Asbestos and other activist groups are working to end
unsafe work conditions.By Angela Paymard
Daily Bruin Contributor
Jose Ayala worked seven hours without a break and without water
while removing asbestos from Royce and Hedrick halls last year.
Wearing a full-body thermal protective suit with a respirator,
he worked in isolated spaces that were covered by plastic, and
maintained negative pressure in the areas to keep toxic asbestos
from escaping.
The worst part: Ayala "was paid $2.11 less per hour than
mandated by the state," said Deborah Axt, a union organizer. "That
means he basically worked half of Friday for free. I think he could
find something better to do with his free time."
Although the Environmental Protection Agency has established
regulations on many facets of asbestos removal, worker complaints
are increasing on topics from unjust wages to unsafe working
conditions.
In response to these grievances, at UCLA and elsewhere, union
and non-union workers have organized Justice in Asbestos, a
campaign for workers’ health and safety in the industry.
"OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration)
regulations are not regularly enforced, (and) if you call OSHA, it
takes them so long to get there that the job is over or the company
has time to clean up," Axt said. "We can’t get just conditions with
the industry like it is right now."
Ayala’s employer Remtech, an asbestos abatement company, has
been accused by campaign organizers of improperly paying their
workers.
Qualification for the state prevailing wage is determined by the
total number of hours that laborers have worked in the industry.
Employees start at step one, moving on to step two after 500 hours,
then to step three after 1,000 hours, with a corresponding increase
in pay.
However, union organizers and campaign workers allege that
Remtech had most of its workers  including Ayala Â
classified at step two, with no checkmark to ensure the accuracy of
that classification.
The campaign also questions UCLA’s and OSHA’s responsibility in
contributing to these alleged payroll violations.
"(UCLA and OSHA’s) inactivity regarding this situation is
unacceptable," said Will Yamada, a campaign activist. "It is their
responsibility to make sure the rules are followed.
"That is why UCLA has to receive a certified payroll and why
OSHA has to check worksites. They aren’t doing their part," he
added.
UCLA officials seem to feel differently.
It is not the university’s responsibility to ensure that workers
are classified properly, according to Jackie Raymond, an
administrative analyst for Contracts Administration in Capital
Programs.
"This is a division of labor problem," Raymond said. "We cannot
determine what step (asbestos workers) are on. However, we do look
at their wages to see they are within prevailing wage. If there’s a
discrepancy, we notify the company immediately."
Apparently, university officials did not notice any
discrepancies.
Although Remtech has been criticized by unions and the campaign
for payroll violations, organizers admit that "Remtech is actually
one of the better companies in the industry in terms of its
disposal of toxic waste," said Axt, a leader in the Justice in
Asbestos campaign. No health violations have been recorded against
the company in the last three years, according to the South Coast
Air Quality Management District.
"However," continued Axt, "they are one of the worst (companies)
in terms of paying their workers properly."
Bill Vitta, the owner of Remtech, seems to feel differently
about the circumstances.
"I try to be as fair as I can be to our workers," he said.
"There are 3 to 4,000 workers in this high-turnover industry. To
keep track of all the people that flow in and out of this company
alone, not to mention others, would require a staff in itself."
His staff makes rough guesses at workers’ classifications, Vitta
said.
Although Remtech is a target of the Justice in Asbestos
campaign, it is not the only one. Recently, campaign workers and
union organizers held protested against CST Environmental, one of
the biggest abatement companies in the industry.
According to protesters, the company has been assessed nearly
$75,000 in fines within the last five years. Infractions included
improper encapsulation (keeping asbestos from escaping into public
spaces) and hazardous methods of removal.
"With every contractor you probably speak with, they’ll complain
and complain and complain that they cannot compete with CST
Environmental without cutting a few corners," Axt said.
"If (a contractor) wants to be really sneaky about it, a lot of
corners could be cut. Since there is no one out there enforcing
these regulations, it’s happening more and more. The Justice in
Asbestos campaign is about leveling this playing field and cleaning
up the industry," he continued.