OCCUPATIONAL ASTHMA
What is it?
Asthma is an inflammatory disease of
the lungs characterised by reversible
airway obstruction. The airways obstruction
or narrowing can result spontaneously or
as a result of medical treatment.
There are two types of asthma and these are as follows:-
- Irritant Asthma
Irritants such as volatile acids can cause wheezing and shortness of breath
in anyone who inhales them. A severe form of Irritant Induced Asthma is called
Reactive Airways Disease Syndrome (RADS).
RADS is a severe form of Irritant Induced Asthma which is caused when the
worker is exposed to high levels of airway irritants. The symptoms normally
resolve
but are followed by continued “reactive airways” that flare up around
dust/fumes.
- Allergic Asthma.
This is the classical definition of Occupation Asthma. The initial material
“sensitises” the worker’s airways and, as with Irritant Asthma
full-blown asthma often develops
with general exposure to dust/fumes causing symptoms of breathlessness.
Symptoms
The symptoms frequently consist of periodic attacks of wheezing, chest tightness
and breathless resulting from constriction of the airways.
In Occupational Asthma, symptoms are normally greatly improved when the worker
is removed from the workplace environment (e.g. at weekends
or on holiday).
Symptoms do not necessarily arise straightaway, often developing many weeks,
months or years later.
Causes
Some of the occupations carrying the greatest contraction
of Occupational Asthma are as follows:-
- Soldering
- Laboratory animal work
- Spray painting
- Welding
- Saw milling
- Woodworking
- Curing of epoxy resins
The following are recognised risk
substances:-
- grain
- flour
- hay
- soldering flux
- wood dust
- glues/resins
- laboratory animals
- isocyanates
The Law
There are several statutory provisions which require employers to take care
of the health & safety
of their employees. These
are as follows:-
- Reporting
of Injuries, Diseases
and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations
1985
- The Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations
1994, 1998 and 2002
- The Health & Safety
at Work Act 1974
- The Factories
Act 1961
- Personal Protective Equipment
at Work Regulations 1992
- The HSE Occupational Exposure Limits 1998
A Claimant who
establishes a breach of the above regulations
has a good
prospect of succeeding with
a claim. It will also be necessary for the Claimant to prove that the employer
had
a duty
of care
to the employee
and that
the employer
knew
or ought to have known
that by asking for the work to be
completed using certain of the aforementioned
agents/substances in certain conditions,
the
employee would
be exposed to a foreseeable
risk of injury.
Case Studies
Case Study 1
The Claimant, female, aged 52 at the
date of trial, worked as a theatre
sister for approximately
10 years when she was exposed to Glutaraldehyde, a substance used to sterilise
surgical
instruments. At trial, she was still suffering
from respiratory
disability, which
had been assessed at
30-40%. It was aggravated by dust,
fumes and stress. She
was
unable
to undertake vigorous activity
and
her sleep was
affected by coughing. The pattern after
retirement
was
one of gradual deterioration
although she was able to obtain work as a
Project Manager
with
the Salvation
Army, with which she was coping.
The court awarded her damages
in the sum of £30,000
for her condition.
Case Study
2
The Claimant,
female, aged 35 at
the date of trial,
worked for the Defendants
since leaving school.
She contracted industrial Asthma caused by exposure to solder flux fumes
to which
she was sensitised.
She had not
worked since 1994,
some three years after
the date of first diagnosis of her condition.
She was awarded £120,477
damages for pain and suffering and future loss of earnings (including
her loss
of pension).
Case Study 3
The Claimant was a radiographer employed by
the Defendant and suffered
occupational Asthma caused
by exposure to x-ray chemicals. Due to his breathing difficulties he
had to take ill health retirement
and retrained as an Occupational Therapist,
obtaining
employment on a two
year contract
by another health authority.
He was awarded
compensation in the sum of £69,247.
|