Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Labor Department: Who, us?

Rocky Mountain News

Published August 1, 2008 at 8 p.m.

Text size  

More Editorials

More stories »

We were left scratching our heads after this week's Studio 12 program on KBDI TV that highlighted this newspaper's series on the government's treatment of sick and dying workers who built nuclear arms during the Cold War.

On the one hand, it was good to see Peter Turcic, the director of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program at the Department of Labor, emerge from his shell and call for revamping the process governing how stricken workers qualify for compensation. Indeed, the soon-to-retire official advocated scrapping two key parts of the frustrating process.

Since Labor officials had refused to talk to reporter Laura Frank during her investigation of the claims debacle, Turcic's public appearance amounts to genuine progress. Sure, he was clearly agitated with Frank (who appeared on the same Studio 12 panel), but he nevertheless fielded a series of pointed questions.

Yet Labor's sudden openness hardly revealed a change of heart regarding its own responsibility for the heart-wrenching stories documented by the Rocky of claimants stymied by unconscionable delays, paperwork demands and rule changes.

In advocating a revamped claims process, Turcic conveniently targeted two areas handled not by his department at all, but by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Unless we're missing something, Turcic failed to acknowledge any weaknesses in Labor's approach. His mantra, rather, was as follows: We're just following the law - a law that critics allegedly fail to understand.

Now don't get us wrong: Like Turcic, we're all for discarding the "dose reconstruction" process under which a worker's past exposure to dangerous substances is estimated. Given the lamentable state of records at some nuclear sites, dose reconstruction is too often a case of garbage in, garbage out.

We also agree that the process of designating groups of workers at a particular site who were exposed to radiation has been hobbled by maddening difficulties.

Nevertheless, the idea that the Department of Labor - which administers the claims process - is without fault is just not credible. Turcic maintained that claims examiners "strive to say yes to claimants" and "make every effort" to rule favorably within legal constraints. Well, that is certainly what the law expects. In fact, it requires the program to be "compassionate, fair and timely." Yet we can't imagine anyone applying those three words - or even one of them - to the cases highlighted in the Rocky.

For example, although the burden of proof is on claimants, they are denied such elementary information as the lists of dangerous substances they were exposed to at their specific work stations. National security is the excuse.

For that matter, although Congress expected claims examiners to consider relevant scientific data, somehow the cluster of brain tumors at Rocky Flats - and research suggesting the cluster may be no accident - has failed to result in victories for victims.

We could go on with examples, but for argument's sake let's say Turcic is correct. Let's imagine that his colleagues' rulings faithfully reflect the mandate of the law. Even if that were true, by what calculus does a "compassionate, fair and timely" system keep terribly sick and dying people in bureaucratic limbo for months and often years while their cases are considered and then reconsidered?

By all means, let Congress reform and streamline the claims process. In the meantime, let the Labor Department reform itself.

Comments

  • August 2, 2008

    5:07 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    roger44 writes:

    Congress do something? That's a pipe dream. When it comes to doing something right seems they just bog it down with bureaucratic BS. National security is the excuse they use to not pay.

  • August 2, 2008

    1:33 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    BikerChick writes:

    ..
    The "Colorado Delegation" in the U S Congress represents all of us - equally. Rack your brain and do your best to remember when they ALL gathered together to get something important done for 'We-the-People' of Colorado. Make a list.

    There is nothing stopping those fine politicians from coming together to wage a powerful battle for the Rocky Flats workers and their families. Cancer has no political party.

    How hard can it be to get the elected Colorado Members of the U S Senate and House to come together for the common good ? During early August, the top-guns, Deputy Chief of Staff, in each of the Colorado Congressional, House and Senate, offices could QUICKLY hold a one-hour meeting to draft a strongly worded letter to the President of the United States, and kick the posteriors of the Cabinet Secretarys of Labor, HEW and Energy in that process. Will they ?

    There are three or four other issues that demand similar apolitical efforts. That's how California gets more dollars for highways, and that's how Nevada gets more money for bailing out the folks on both sides of the felony mortgages. How about Colorado ?

    What's your guess - will Ken and John Salazar come together with Allard and Tancredo and DeGette and Lamborn and Perlmutter and Musgrave and any others for the common good ? Will Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi allow a sensible approach ?

    Please, behave yourself; Laughing Out Loud is not polite.

    Our elected and appointed national 'leaders' are far more fascinated with their party and their egoic desires than with YOUR personal future. Even now, some of them are plotting a set of tax increases for you to pay - to fund the entitlement society.

    For an exercise in frustration, call the offices of each of the clowns that represent us in the U S Congress. Then tell your friends what happened. Is it any wonder why more than 90% of the electorate (both parties) are disgusted with the U S Congress, which rates lower in popularity polls than President Bush. Yes, really.
    ..

  • August 3, 2008

    6:57 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    DakotaPlainsman writes:

    And who might I ask, after seeing this demonstation by the government to handle a health issue, still wants the government to take over health care for the rest of the country?