Dr. Paul Kotin to J. A. McKinney on the Lack of a Corporate Asbestos Policy (1980)

A two-page memo of May 30, 1980, from Dr. Paul Kotin, J-M's senior vice president for health, safety and environment, to J. A. McKinney, J-M's president, copied to G. E. Parker, on "Asbestos Policy." Kotin wrote that he was "acutely distressed and somewhat bewildered by the confusion, almost anarchy," over a corporate policy on asbestos, that J-M only reacted to crises, and that its divisions disagreed even over using "asbestos free" in advertisements. He asked that the asbestos program led by Earl Parker, Jim Reis and Wyatt McCallie be given authority over every division and an asbestos "war chest" of at least $250,000, warning that "Shortsightedness is as great a threat to J-M as juries are."

What it shows

Kotin added: "Finally, if the decision has been made that asbestos has no future, then key personnel in the Corporation must know that this is the case. We can then spend our time preparing an orderly phase out." He still felt "the situation can yet be salvaged." The memo shows J-M's top health officer, in 1980, telling the president that the company had no settled policy on asbestos, and raising whether it should plan to leave the asbestos business.

In Johns-Manville's chronology

Johns-Manville's own chronology of what the company knew describes this document as follows:

Memorandum from Paul Kotin to John McKinney, cc: Earl Parker, 5/30/80, re "Asbestos Policy". "I am acutely distressed and somewhat bewildered by the confusion, almost anarchy, that has become manifest during the past week to ten days in relation to a corporate policy on asbestos. . . . Repeated instances during the past two weeks have reinforced my belief that in the periods between responding to crises we are failing to make any efforts in constructive and self-initiated direction. . . . Another grave aspect of the present predicament .is the general uncertainty and the depressing effect on morale that goes with our vacillation. And not less discouraging is the fact that in the absence of any firm policy, every little issue generates heated and involved discussion because there is no policy extant by which issues could be reviewed and the course of action determined. . . . Two things I am particularly concerned about are the lack of a commitment of adequate resources to address the asbestos situation thoroughly and the ineffective use of both Reis and McCallie." He points to several specific conflicts between managing employees within J-M and concludes that "short sightedness is as great a threat to J-M as juries are."