Beyond notification: a case study from Cloquet, Minnesota

Our plain-English summary of Beyond notification: a case study from Cloquet, Minnesota, by M.J. Finendale (American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 1993).

The study

• Author: M.J. Finendale
• Journal: American Journal of Industrial Medicine
• Published: 1993;23(1):153-9
• Cited by: 1 article, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

Abstract

All members of Local 158 of the United Paperworkers International Union in Cloquet, Minnesota, were invited to attend a meeting to notify them about the outcome of the Union's study concerning exposure to asbestos fiber. Union members and their families were contacted by letter, radio and television announcements, area newspapers, and word of mouth. They were informed about the medical screening that was being planned and about other information on asbestos-related diseases. During the meeting, they were asked to attend one of the educational sessions, to schedule an appointment for the screening, and to fill out a medical history. It was determined that paperworkers with asbestos-related disease might have rights to at least two types of compensation: worker's compensation from their employers and/or court- or jury-awarded compensation from asbestos manufacturers. Other sources of compensation such as social security of disability pensions might also be available to eligible individuals. The Union did not have a complete listing of all the individuals who worked at plants or in operations where asbestos exposure may have occurred. The Union solicited the aid of the Minnesota Department of Health to help identify former asbestos-exposed workers and to develop an ongoing screening and medical program for workers who were exposed but did not develop symptoms of asbestos-related disease; these illnesses usually take 20 years or more to develop. However, the Union was able to follow-up the notification and subsequent screening by sending members and their families the results of the initial screenings and other information concerning the status of any legal actions taken on behalf of the exposed.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

In plain English

This is a descriptive case report by a United Paperworkers International Union representative on how the union notified and screened former Conwed Corporation workers in Cloquet, Minnesota, after the company was sold in 1985. The author reported that the high asbestos exposure period at the plant was 1958 to 1974, that stockpiled asbestos material was used until the 1985 sale, and that many workers took their dirty work clothes home to be laundered. No fiber type was named. From a 1966 union list of about 570 names, the union found addresses for 332. Of these, 201 accepted the screening invitation, and another 200 workers came forward. Of those screened in 1986, 61 percent had asbestos-related changes on the first X-ray reading, about half pleural and half parenchymal. The article also reported Minnesota Department of Health findings. The lung cancer death rate for men in the Cloquet area was 36% higher than for all Minnesota men. Six known or suspected mesothelioma cases were found among men who worked at Conwed, seventy times the expected rate. The author noted that Conwed denied the union employment records and that family members were not included in the initial screening.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Descriptive case report (case study) of a union-run worker notification, health screening, education and legal-assistance program, written by a union representative
• Who was studied: Former workers of Conwed Corporation, members of United Paperworkers International Union Local 158, Cloquet, Minnesota. They were selected from a 1966 union list of about 570 names, with addresses found for 332. Of these, 201 accepted the 1986 screening, and another 200 workers came forward. The Minnesota Department of Health later screened 1,101 former workers and spouses in 1988.
• Exposure: Asbestos used in Conwed's manufacturing process. The high exposure period was 1958 to 1974, with stockpiled asbestos material used until the 1985 sale. Possible take-home exposure came from work clothes laundered at home, and community exposure from dumping in the river, the smokestack and open trucks. No fiber type was specified.
• Main results:
  • Of those screened in the 1986 union screening, 61 percent had asbestos-related changes on the first X-ray reading
  • Of these X-ray changes, about half were pleural and half parenchymal
  • Beyond the 201 invited workers who accepted, another 200 workers came forward for screening
  • Through interviews during the screening, the union learned that many workers took dirty work clothes home to be laundered
  • The Minnesota Department of Health screened 1,101 former Conwed workers and spouses of workers in September to October 1988
  • The Minnesota Department of Health concluded that the lung cancer death rate for men living in the Cloquet area was 36% higher than the rate for all men living in Minnesota
  • Six known or suspected cases of mesothelioma were found among men who worked at Conwed, seventy times the expected rate (reported from Minnesota Department of Health work)
  • The Minnesota Department of Health identified another 1,800 exposed workers, bringing the total to between 4,000 and 5,000
• The authors' conclusion: The author concluded that it was not known how many people would develop disease, and that the union and its members across the country should learn from what happened in Cloquet
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The union did not have a complete list of people who worked where asbestos exposure may have occurred
  • Conwed denied the union employment records, so workers were selected from a 1966 union list
  • Addresses could be found for only 332 of about 570 names on the 1966 list
  • Spouses and children who may have been exposed through work clothes were not included in the initial screening
  • The analysis of the initial screening was not finished at the time described

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Asbestos Exposure.

Related studies

• Experiences of a state-sponsored notification and screening program for asbestos workers — A.P. Bender, A.N. Williams, et al. (1993)
• Asbestos screening and education programs for building and construction trades unions — S. Tillett, P. Sullivan (1993)
• Assessing quality of life when planning and evaluating worker notification programs: two case examples — B.E. Meyerowitz (1993)
• A case-control study of mesothelioma in Minnesota iron ore (taconite) miners — C.S. Lambert, B.H. Alexander, et al. (2016)
• Occupational exposures and lung cancer risk among Minnesota taconite mining workers — E.M. Allen, B.H. Alexander, et al. (2015)
• Observations of cancer incidence surveillance in Duluth, Minnesota — E.E. Sigurdson (1983)

Browse more research in American Journal of Industrial Medicine, or return to medical research.