The statement of the international trade union movement for chrysotile
On September 06, 2010 on a website of ILO Safework department appeared the so-called Position on safety in the use of asbestos», referred to as the ILO official point of view on asbestos, which contains an appeal to a global ban of chrysotile (white asbestos) use, with the reference, in particular, that the ILO Convention on asbestos №162 should not be used to provide a justification for, or endorsement of, the continued use of asbestos.
In this connection the International Trade-union Movement For Chrysotile declares the following:
The ILO convention ?162 imperatively prohibits the use of crocidolite (blue asbestos) and products containing this fibre. Spraying of all forms of asbestos is prohibited.
It is the uncontrollable use of amphiboles in the past that had resulted in significant growth of the asbestos-related diseases in the countries of Western Europe, Australia, South Africa, etc. In those countries, where chrysotile was historically applied, the essential growth of the asbestos-related diseases is not observed.
Moreover, latest scientific studies on chrysotile convincingly prove, that chrysotile alone does not appear to be a risk factor of developing mesothelioma and has less potent risk to developing of lung cancer, in comparison with amphiboles.
That’s why WHA.60 — the highest decision making body of World Health Organization, adopted a differentiated approach to regulating chrysotile and amphiboles.
The labour unions affiliated with International Trade Union Movement For Chrysotile movement carefully supervise performance of the corresponding articles of ILO Convention ?162 on safety in use of asbestos rules of at the enterprises, on safety and hygiene of work concerning prevention, control and protection of workers against possible health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos, the enforcement of regulations prescribing adequate engineering controls and work practices, including workplace hygiene.
These measures have resulted that at our enterprises the asbestos-related diseases become a rarity, due to the carefully fulfilled methods of prevention and control, including, in particular, constant medical examinations and receiving individual advice concerning their health in relation to their work.
In connection with above mentioned, we mark that fact, that the incessant appeals on behalf of several officers from ILO and WHO aimed at global chrysotile ban are nothing but apparent serving for commercial interests of the plaintiffs’lawyers firms specializing in asbestos litigation,companies producing chrysotile substitutes, and firms performing asbestos removal from buildings. As far as application of substitutes is concerned, according to the standards of Convention 162, they should be scientifically evaluated as harmless or less harmful.
The existing evaluations of alternative materials not only show their harm for health, but some of them are carcinogens. Moreover, these substitutes do not possess all useful and necessary properties, which chrysotile has.
Now chrysotile is used in the countries of the world, which makes 80% population of the Earth. In all countries, where chrysotile-cement materials are widely used, they have the important socio- economic significance. Europian Union’s striving for distributing a ban on chrysotile use worldwide in favour to economic interests of the European producers of substitutes which cost several times more than chrysotile, does not serve the interests of the majority of the countries representing modern global community. The chrysotile-containing materials are affordable, its cheapest analogues are several times more expensive. It causes continuation of chrysotile use in less developed countries.
The International Trade Union Movement for Chrysotile firmly follows the position of chrysotile safe use within the framework of decisions taken by highest decision making bodies of WHO and ILO concerning chrysotile.