The Lombardi Law Firm Blog

Manganese In Welding Fumes Causes Brain Damage

According to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, in 2006 there were approximately 462,000 welding, soldiering, and brazing workers. The occupation was expected to grow only about five percent between the years 2006 and 2016. Aside from the fact that employment for welders is expected to "grow more slowly than average," job availability for welders remains optimistic due to employers' reports of inability to find qualified welders. But, while welders can rest easy that there are still jobs available in this tough market, there remains a dark side to the trade.

Manganese, a toxic metal, is contained in welding fumes, which can cause parkinsonism. Parkinsonism is a neurological syndrome that is characterized by tremors (involuntary muscle movement), hypokinesia (diminished movement of body muscles), rigidity (muscles tighten), and postural instability (sensation of instability).

Manganese is a naturally occurring element that is required for animals and humans to function normally, and exposure to low levels of manganese in the diet is essential to maintaining good health in humans. The average daily intake of manganese through food is between 1 and 5 milligrams per day.

Those welders affected have trouble completing everyday tasks such as driving, eating, and brushing their teeth. What were once mundane tasks have now become the most mentally taxing.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) state that there is evidence that the brain damage caused by manganese in welding fumes can result in a greater incidence of speech impairment, tremors, and gait disturbances among welders when compared to non-welders.

Due to welders' exposure to toxic fumes, this makes the welding industry a prime target for litigation. Lawsuits, which began in the late 1970s, hardly put a dent in the $5 billion welding-products industry due to the fact that there was no reliable scientific data proving that welding fumes, or manganese in the fumes, caused parkinsonism.

In December of 2007, a U.S. District Court Judge, Kathleen O'Malley, ordered the disclosure of welding industry payments to researchers studying the effects of manganese on welders. The order resulted in the revelation that welding companies had paid $12.5 million to 25 organizations and 33 researches. Nearly all of these researchers and organizations published findings dismissing connections between welding fumes and welder complaints. In a 2003case, and Illinois jury awarded a $1 million verdict to a welder, which resulted in a large influx of lawsuits targeted at welding companies. Again in 2005, a case stemming from a Shipyard in Mississippi settled for seven figures.

According to an article published in November, welding fumes could be the next asbestos.

University of Iowa employees who are accused violating HIPPA are given the boot.

Seven University of Iowa workers were suspended and one was fired after an internal privacy investigation indicated the hospital’s privacy policy had been broken. Even within the hospital patient privacy is maintained. With over 7000 employees and a budge of over $768 million that is no small measure to enforce. Having a privacy policy that is enforced and the violators disciplined is not just important but necessary. Maintaining patient confidentiality is a vital part of a hospital’s basic and essential functions.

The law is referred to as HIPPA. It stands for Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). For a prima on HIPPA see Patient Confidentiality, The Times They Are a Changin’, by Albert B. Lowenfels, MD discussion of HIPPA and the Hippocratic Oath.

"What I may see or hear in the course of the treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself, holding such things shameful to be spoken about." Hippocratic Oath

Patients don’t have time to ask and to explore how the hospital stores its sensitive and private information. Whether it is a main frame or pc terminal patients need to know their private information is secure and will not be available to those who are just curious, even when that person is employed by the hospital.

Hospital employees need to be aware that patient information is private and they can be fired for just being curious. Looking up information can lead to criminal charges if improperly handled and provided to third parties. It’s no different than an employee taking cash from the register to just borrow for the week. Both are essentially taking something that doesn’t belong to them.

And if you’re fired for violating HIPPA, unemployment benefits are probably not going to be available to you. When fired for cause, violation of clear work rules – it’s pretty clear that you should know right from wrong – the employee is ineligible for unemployment benefits.  Be smart, not curious.

Taking a Deposition: Deposition Testimony Rules

I promised my readers more on taking a deposition and the Eight Simple Rules© along with the One Simple Question©. Do you recall the Eight Simple Rules©? For the sake of clarity I’ll repeat them again.

Deposition Testimony Rules:

1.  Tell the Truth

2.  Listen to the Question

3.  Make sure you understand the Question

4.  If you don’t understand the Question ask for clarification.

5.  Pause and think about your answer.

6.  If you can answer with a “Yes” or “No”, answer with a “yes” or “no”.

7.  If the answer requires more than a “yes” or “no”, keep your answer concise/brief.

8.  Don’t offer any information.

Now let’s talk about the mistakes clients make during depositions and the tricks defense lawyers employ to make you slip up. The list is quite long so this will be an ongoing series. Remember I’m not sitting around all day blawgging, I do have to work.

A deponent is a person; not a disease. If you’re answering questions in a deposition then you are the deponent. A deponent is under oath, meaning they have administered an oath to you. An oath means you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. As in a deposition at trial you will also be under oath. That’s important because if your answers appear different at trial than they were in the deposition the implication is that you’re not being truthful. Here is what you will hear at trial. “At the deposition your answer was different, so should I assume you were telling us the truth then or now? How can I tell when you’re telling the truth?” As you can well imagine this would be an uncomfortable situation to be in so remember the Eight Simple Rules© and learn to follow them.

Rapid Fire – Rapid fire is a questioning technique used to trip the deponent up on rules two through eight and to make your answer appear to be less than trustworthy. You will recognize this technique is in use when answering the lawyer’s questions makes you light headed or out of breath. Rapid fire is what it sounds like. The next question comes immediately after you answer the previous question. There is little time to think. The deponent starts to feel anxious, and reacts by “firing back” at the lawyer.

But what deponents have to realize is that seldom can they win this exchange. The lawyer has had weeks to prepare his/her questions. They are professionals and some, like me, have taken more than a thousand depositions. During rapid fire it won’t take long before emotions take the place of reason and the Eight Simple Rules© are forgotten.  I don’t care if you “meant to tell the truth” but because of “the lawyer’s questions” you became emotional and lost your head. Follow the damn rules.

So how do you recognize this technique and how do you combat it? Well it’s pretty simple. Go back to the Eight Simple Rules© and review them. Remember, listen to the question, then make sure you understand the question, followed by if you don’t understand the question ask for clarification; and then pause and think about your answer.

Let’s stop there today because this is enough. Don’t be fooled by the question or the person asking the questions. Leave your emotions at the door. No one cares that you just want to get this over with and to be treated fairly. The lawyer employing “Rapid Fire” he isn’t here to treat you fairly, he’s here to represent his client’s interests. And if you don’t understand that point you’re making a big mistake. There are only two reasons for him/her to speak with you and neither is good for your case. You’re being asked questions so they can figure out a way to pay you nothing or less then you deserve. So read the Eight Simple Rules© and follow them.

Croc, Croc, Croc, Croc, Croc not just a Crock

No product is thought to be dangerous until you’re injured in a way you never thought about. And that’s the point about Crocs, people, but mostly children, are getting hurt in ways parents hadn’t anticipated or imagined possible. To those people that love their Crocs, this is just a bunch of BS. But to the parents of injured children it’s real and unsettling. For the manufacturer of Crocs it’s a publicity nightmare with which they need to come up with a workable solution. Damage control can't just be blaming every parent whose children are unfortunate enough to be injured on an escalator.

Justin in our office posted about Crocs and we received thirty comments and some lighting rod discussion about what he wrote. He didn’t write anything all that controversial so the venom it drew surprised me. Today I’m going to assemble a compendium of what I could find on the Internet about this ugly plastic shoe that when worn makes you look … well, slovenly.

According to information on Wikipedia Crocs, Inc. (NASDAQ: CROX ) is the shoe manufacturer founded by entrepreneur George B. Boedecker, Jr. Originally a Canadian company the Crocs Beach was first sold in November 2002 at the Ft. Lauderdale Boat Show. He sold about 200 pairs.

Manufacture and patents

In June 2004, Crocs purchased Foam Creations and their manufacturing operations to secure exclusive rights to the proprietary foam resin "croslite", which is made using ethylene vinyl acetate^[8][9]. The foam forms itself to a wearer's feet and offers purported medical benefits, according to a number of podiatrists.^[10][11]

Crocs holds four patents covering various utility aspects of its footwear, U.S. Patent No. 6993858 B2 issued February 7, 2006, and U.S. Patent Nos. D517788,, D517789 and D517790 issued on March 28, 2006. The Company also announced that it has filed complaints with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) and the U.S. Federal District Court against 11 companies that manufacture, import or distribute products called Crock-offs that Crocs believes infringe its patents.^[12]

Acquisitions

Various types of Crocs with accessories

On October 3, 2006, Crocs purchased Jibbitz, a manufacturer of accessories that snap into the holes in Crocs, for US$10 million. On July 30, 2007 Crocs agreed to buy Bite Footwear, based out of Redmond, Washington^[13]

People that adore Crocs say we lawyers are picking on them and should stay out of letting people know about the seriousness of the injuries children have suffered while wearing Crocs.

But take a look at what information Wikipedia has listed concerning health and safety.

Health and safety

Footwear such as Crocs and flip-flops came under scrutiny in 2006 when children suffered injuries after the shoes became caught in escalator mechanisms.^[14] This was due to the softness of the shoe's material combined with the relatively smaller size of children's feet.^[15]

Rapid City Regional Hospital in Rapid City, South Dakota changed its dress code in 2007 to prohibit the sandal variants, along with those with Jibbitz holes, citing safety concerns, but still allowed closed-top "Professional" and the healthcare focused "Rx" Crocs to be worn.^[16] Blekinge hospital in Sweden has banned the wearing of "Foppatoffels" (Swedish nickname derived from the owner of the company that imports the shoes, Peter "Foppa" Forsberg) by hospital staff, due to the concern that the shoes may build up static electricity and thus interfere with electronic equipment.^[17][18] Vienna's city hospitals said they were banning popular Crocs plastic clogs, often worn by nursing staff, as they may pose safety risks for patients.^[19]

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has approved a model of Crocs with molded insoles as diabetic footwear, which help wearers avoid foot injuries.^[20]

It’s interesting that hospitals seem to be in the forefront of stopping their employees from wearing this type of shoe to work.

The attorneys on the IB have posted quite a bit about this plastic money making machine. Here is a list of the articles posted:

Defective and Dangerous Products, Crocs Banned For St. Cloud Hospital Workers

Crocs are dangerous. No, not the toothy reptiles; the clogs , Justin Rogers, Des Moines.

Crocs Can Be Dangerous, by Jenny Albano, Baltimore.

Crocs Shoes and Escalator Accidents, by Claude Wyle from San Franciso.

Kentucky Woman Sues Crocs Over Daughter’s Escalator Injury, by Chrissie Cole.

Mike Parker, Escalator Accidents/Injuries Involving Crocs.

Kids, Crocs, Rubber Shoes and Flip Flop Sandals AND Escalators a Bad Mix, by Craig Kelley, Nebraska.

Escalors injure 10,000 each year,by Brent Adams, Fayetteville.

There is a web site titled “I Hate Crocs Dot Com”.  They offer The I Hate Crocs store and Our Croc-burning video, along with Our Croc-cutting video and Our I Hate Crocs Facebook group. The people that run this site do have an email address. ihatecrocs@gmail.com.  They claim to have over 1,000 members. The discussion board and Wall may be of interest to those with an injury and whose attorneys are investigating a claim. Facebook shows they have over 3,000 members.

A general Internet search showed you can buy a cellphone case that looks just like a Croc. Oh my, the world may be closer to ending than first thought. Even REI is selling Crocs.  Not hiking Crocs but regular plastic ones. Some even come with furry collars. Maybe because there are no escalators in the mountains they feel it’s safe to wear them at base camp or around the camp fire.

It also looks like tree huggers and the folks from Berkeley, California are debating just how environmentally friendly Croc owners are being knowing they are a petroleum based product. I’m not so sure wearing an item of clothing that is made most everywhere but the United States is all that sound for our economy, but perhaps they feel so good the wearer could care less if they can afford to pay bills.

The company that cooked up the formula for the proprietary resins is Foam Creations, in Canada, which Crocs Inc. purchased in June 2004. Until 2005, the resins were compounded -- mixed together -- in Italy, but Crocs Inc. has since geared up additional compounding facilities. Crocs Inc. owns its own manufacturing facilities for the finished product in Canada and Mexico, but about 50 percent of all Crocs are made in China, and there are also third-party manufacturers in Florida, Italy and Romania. The prospectus offers an interesting rationale for the eggs-in-multiple-manufacturing-baskets strategy. Speed to market is critical for Crocs -- gotta get those lime-colored Kids Cayman Crocs into the local retail outlet NOW, before fickle 5-year-olds move on to the next model. Crocs Inc. waits for no slow boat from China!

All of this has lead me to believe I’ll never own a pair and over this Labor Day weekend be careful, it’s a dangerous world in which we live. Be looking, be aware and be safe. Enjoy the holiday and I’ll see you on Tuesday.