US Delta workers poisoned by toxic work uniforms file class action lawsuit

Thousands of Delta Air Lines workers have suffered hair loss, skin rashes, nose bleeds and other symptoms from toxic chemicals in their work uniforms, according to a class action lawsuit filed on December 31.

The now-infamous “Passport Plum” uniforms were purchased from Lands’ End, an American clothing retailer. They were issued to tens of thousands of employees, who were required to wear them after May 29, 2018.

The uniforms were treated with a toxic cocktail of chemical additives and finishes that were designed to make them “high stretch, wrinkle and stain resistant, waterproof, anti-static, and deodorizing,” according to the lawsuit. This combination of additives and finishes caused skin rashes, headaches and other health problems among many workers.

“I am confident that these uniforms are affecting many thousands of people,” attorney Bruce A. Maxwell said in an interview with the World Socialist Web Site. “My office has fielded in excess of 2,000 calls.” A closed Facebook page for flight attendants, he said, already has around 6,500 participants.

Maxwell, of the Jacksonville, Florida law firm Terrell Hogan, is the lead attorney on the case. More than 500 workers have joined the lawsuit already, he said, adding that he would soon be amending the complaint to increase that number to around a thousand workers.

“These uniforms were issued to 64,000 employees,” Maxwell says, of which 24,000 are flight attendants. The remaining 40,000 are customer service workers, ramp and gate agents, Sky Club workers, as well as cargo, maintenance and technical workers.

In this latter category, which is numerically larger, relatively fewer workers have come forward so far, which Maxwell attributes to fear of being fired. “I’m hoping the more attention is brought to this matter, the more will come out.”

1579573991200.png

A Delta worker's skin after wearing the work uniform

While images of skin rashes and boils are gruesome, Maxwell emphasized that the damage extends beyond the skin. “The external is only part of this,” he says. “There is also the internal.”

According to the lawsuit, the health problems reported by affected workers, which have persisted in many cases long term, include a wide range of respiratory problems, including severe respiratory distress, vocal cord dysfunction, breathing difficulties, shortness of breath, coughing and tightness of chest. In addition, effects on the skin have included “contact dermatitis, skin blisters, skin rashes, boils, hives, bruising, eczema, scarring, hair loss, [and] hair follicle inflammation.”

1579574028800.png

A Delta worker woke up bleeding profusely from the nose

Workers have also reported blurred vision, dry eyes, nosebleeds, ringing ears, sinus problems, migraines, headaches, fatigue, muscle weakness, anxiety, swollen lymph nodes, anaphylactic type symptoms (severe allergic reactions) and auto-immune conditions.

Among Maxwell’s clients are flight attendants who were previously in good physical shape, including workers who would regularly run for exercise. “They can’t run anymore. Their breathing difficulties are such that they can’t do it.” He described speaking to one worker whose hair was falling out in “chunks.” He described another worker waking up from a nap to discover “blood everywhere,” having bled profusely from the nose.

1579574109700.png

A Delta worker's back after wearing the work uniforms

Delta’s employee absence level, recorded as “call-ins” for calling in sick, spiked after the introduction of the uniforms.

The lawsuit details the individual ordeals of numerous workers who were poisoned by the uniforms. For example, flight attendant Stephanie Andrews of Murray, Utah suffered “from asthma, vocal cord dysfunction, breathing difficulties, shortness of breath, coughing, tightness of chest, contact dermatitis, skin rashes, hives, hair loss, heart palpitations, fatigue, and auto-immune conditions.” Flight attendant Janelle Austin of Atlanta, Georgia suffered from “hair loss, skin irritation, rashes, itchiness, difficulty breathing, fatigue, headaches, eye irritation, and sinus irritation.” Flight attendant Phyllis Heffeldinger of Londonville, Ohio suffered from chest pain and difficulty breathing.

After the uniforms were implemented in May, by the end of August Delta itself had acknowledged that around 1,900 out of 64,000 employees had reported “some type of concern” with the uniforms. By November, the number had risen 3,000.

1579574165600.png

A Delta worker photographed this clump of hair that had fallen out

The lawsuit alleges that the uniforms pose “ongoing, unreasonable risks of harm” to the workers who are wearing them, asking the judge to order Lands’ End to recall the uniforms and to establish a monitoring program over the adverse health effects of the uniforms.

According to the lawsuit, testing performed on behalf of the workers has revealed “the presence of chemicals and heavy metals far in excess of industry-accepted safe levels for garments,” including:
  • Chromium harmful to the skin, eyes, blood, and respiratory system;
  • Antimony harmful to the eyes and skin; causes hair loss; used to make flame-proofing materials;
  • Mercury at high vapor concentrations, it can cause quick and severe lung damage; at low vapor concentrations over an extended period of time, it can cause neurological disturbances, memory problems, skin rash and kidney abnormalities; mercury can pass from a mother to her baby through the placenta during pregnancy and through breast milk after birth;
  • Formaldehyde skin, throat, lungs and eye irritant; repeated exposure can cause cancer;
  • Fluorine eye irritant; harmful to kidneys, teeth, bones, nerves and muscles; used as a stain repellant; and
  • Bromine skin, mucous membrane, and tissue irritant; used as a fire retardant.
Discussing the testing that has been conducted on behalf of Delta workers, Maxwell pointed to fluorine in particular. “The numbers came back pretty high on that.”

Maxwell pointed out, as an additional concern, that after exposure to toxic chemicals and metals, a person can become “sensitized.” If that happens, “your auto-immune system shuts down, and you become unable to fend off future exposures to that chemical.” Workers have reported that even if they are no longer wearing the uniform, they can have adverse reactions simply to sitting next to someone who is wearing the uniform. This phenomenon is the result of “off-gassing,” or the release of airborne particles from the contaminated fabric.

The lawsuit, which was filed against Lands’ End but not Delta itself, alleges that the uniforms were defective, that Lands’ End failed to provide appropriate and necessary warnings, and that Lands’ End was negligent in designing, testing and inspecting the uniforms.

American Airlines workers reported similar issues with Twin Hill uniforms, which were distributed to 70,000 airline employees in September 2016. Workers interviewed by the WSWS in June of last year reported body rashes, burning throat and eyes, coughing and headaches. After the scandal over the Twin Hill uniforms, American Airlines attempted to reassure workers by promising to switch to Lands’ End.

“We are the new radium girls,” flight attendant and author Heather Poole said at the time, referring to thousands of female workers at paint factories who were exposed to the radioactive element in the early 20th century. “It took them years to get sick, so the company would deny responsibility.”

Delta Airlines is also notorious among flight attendants for its workers’ compensation regime, which systematically denies adequate healthcare even for crippling workplace injuries. The airline’s third-party administrator, Sedgwick, is also the claims administrator for Amazon, where it is widely hated for its ruthlessness. A number of injured flight attendants spoke to the World Socialist Web Site about their experiences last year.

After the Delta workers’ lawsuit was filed against Lands’ End, American Airlines claimed to workers that the new Lands’ End uniforms for American Airlines are safe, notwithstanding the lawsuit. “I hope they’re sure about that,” Maxwell says drily.

Alaska Airlines and Southwest Airlines workers have also reported health problems resulting from their work uniforms.

A recent Harvard study published in the peer-reviewed journal BMC Public Health, titled “Symptoms related to new flight attendant uniforms,” found a correlation between health problems among 684 Alaska Airlines workers and their uniforms. When the uniforms were introduced in 2011, health problems increased, and after the uniforms were recalled in 2014, the study showed a decrease. The study concluded: “This study found a relationship between health complaints and the introduction of new uniforms in this longitudinal occupational cohort.”

Formaldehyde-releasing textile resins, in particular, constitute a cheap means for employers to limit wrinkles on employee uniforms, keeping employees looking “neat.”

While the companies insist that the level of each toxic chemical and metal in the uniforms is limited to a “safe” level, it appears likely that the effects of the chemicals and metals are aggravated in combination with each other.

“We don’t have any standards anymore in the US,” Maxwell said. He pointed to the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976, which gives the Environmental Protection Agency authority to regulate the industrial chemicals such as those to which Delta workers were exposed.

“This law is on the books,” Maxwell said. “Apparently, our government is not acting as a regulatory force on this law. I don’t see where that is being enforced in the garment industry.”

Maxwell also pointed to Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which has promulgated limits on exposure to toxic metals in the workplace. Delta workers were exposed to quantities that are “way above that.”

Maxwell continued, “I don’t understand why that’s not being applied or looked at because, my goodness, that’s in the workplace.”

Article (archive)

Truly, a triumph for late-stage capitalism.
 
Mercury is extremely toxic and this has been known for centuries, what the hell was it doing in fabric of the uniforms AT ALL???
Well, we don't know for sure that this is elemental mercury. Might be safe mercury like thiomersal.

I would not be surprised in the least that these uniforms were cut from a a roll of Chinese fabric with 10x the "safe" limit of half the periodic table in it because they don't care or figured "it's going overseas, won't be MY problem when the skin starts fallin' off".
On the other hand, when you pull that shit in China to Chinese people, the Han Empire will execute you no matter how much money you have. Worth considering.
 
Something tells me this case is going to get dismissed pretty quickly. The whole thing sounds more than a little....off. Mercury and formaldehyde? I would like to see those test results, because there is no valid reason for either of those to be used to treat anything a person would be wearing. Not even in china. Even they would know exposure to even tiny amounts of either of those things would be fatal and result in world wide attention and lawsuits. Not 'it makes me sick and causes rashes' way either. Flat out fucking lethal. Formaldehyde in particular absorbs through your skin on contact and can kill in very tiny amounts. Ask anyone who works in the funeral industry about that stuff. That this is just being noticed recently and nobody died? Yeah i'm finding that hard to believe. Whatever is going on here there is more to the story and i'm not buying that list of chemicals the employees were supposedly exposed to. No fucking way, people would have been dropping dead left and right within a week. Perhaps in the ICU with brain damage and vomiting up blood while having seizures and brain damage with some of that stuff if they were lucky

I really want to see where this is going and see some of those test results for myself

Yeah, not that I am doubting that a healthy number of employees suffered some sort fo reactions to something in these new uniforms, the lawyer list of scary chemical words raises immediate bullshit flags.

  • Chromium harmful to the skin, eyes, blood, and respiratory system;
  • Antimony harmful to the eyes and skin; causes hair loss; used to make flame-proofing materials;
  • Mercury at high vapor concentrations, it can cause quick and severe lung damage; at low vapor concentrations over an extended period of time, it can cause neurological disturbances, memory problems, skin rash and kidney abnormalities; mercury can pass from a mother to her baby through the placenta during pregnancy and through breast tard cum after birth;
  • Formaldehyde skin, throat, lungs and eye irritant; repeated exposure can cause cancer;
  • Fluorine eye irritant; harmful to kidneys, teeth, bones, nerves and muscles; used as a stain repellant; and
  • Bromine skin, mucous membrane, and tissue irritant; used as a fire retardant.
Notice how they don't talk about actual quantities? They don't talk about what they found in the actual clothing. Chromium is used in dyes. It will be found in most of the clothes in your closet. Formaldehyde is used in a number of clothesmaking practices and has been for centuries. Without any numbers this is meaningless as pretty much any piece of modern cloth that you didn't spin yourself from home grown sheep would have some. And for fuck sake Bromine is required by law. It is heavily saturated in all childrens clothing, all plastic used in toys and electronics, and all work uniforms and clothing. (Ever notice how your old toys or old computers get that nicotine yellow color? That's the Bromine).

The key question is what is different about these uniforms from other typical work uniforms? What did Land's End's cheap Chinese factory throw into the mix? Whatever it is, it's not on that lawyer list of scary words.
 
Yeah, not that I am doubting that a healthy number of employees suffered some sort fo reactions to something in these new uniforms, the lawyer list of scary chemical words raises immediate bullshit flags.

  • Chromium harmful to the skin, eyes, blood, and respiratory system;
  • Antimony harmful to the eyes and skin; causes hair loss; used to make flame-proofing materials;
  • Mercury at high vapor concentrations, it can cause quick and severe lung damage; at low vapor concentrations over an extended period of time, it can cause neurological disturbances, memory problems, skin rash and kidney abnormalities; mercury can pass from a mother to her baby through the placenta during pregnancy and through breast tard cum after birth;
  • Formaldehyde skin, throat, lungs and eye irritant; repeated exposure can cause cancer;
  • Fluorine eye irritant; harmful to kidneys, teeth, bones, nerves and muscles; used as a stain repellant; and
  • Bromine skin, mucous membrane, and tissue irritant; used as a fire retardant.
Notice how they don't talk about actual quantities? They don't talk about what they found in the actual clothing. Chromium is used in dyes. It will be found in most of the clothes in your closet. Formaldehyde is used in a number of clothesmaking practices and has been for centuries. Without any numbers this is meaningless as pretty much any piece of modern cloth that you didn't spin yourself from home grown sheep would have some. And for fuck sake Bromine is required by law. It is heavily saturated in all childrens clothing, all plastic used in toys and electronics, and all work uniforms and clothing. (Ever notice how your old toys or old computers get that nicotine yellow color? That's the Bromine).

The key question is what is different about these uniforms from other typical work uniforms? What did Land's End's cheap Chinese factory throw into the mix? Whatever it is, it's not on that lawyer list of scary words.
Yeah, there's something else that seems odd to me. The pictures shown look a lot like the symptoms you see in scabies, which is something that would be very easy for an airline employee to catch. If the doctors didn't do a skin scraping, it could easily be missed.
 
Oh, this reminds me of this story from 2013:


A label can read 'Made in China' when the garment is made in North Korea. Apparently Chinese firms take orders and outsource some of those orders to North Korea, taking advantage of the competitive exchange rate and rock bottom labour costs.

Companies often have zero real idea of what their supplu chain really entails overseas, despite the assurances they occasionally make to the customer when something bad happens and the blame is laid at unsafe practices in shithole country's factories.

Oh and this bears reading. Apparently formaldyhyde resins are used to produce 'wrinkle free finishes' and flame retardant clothing:


The clothes we wear today are a far cry from those of the past. No friendly neighborhood Gandhi spinning raw cotton into reels, no friendly neighborhood artisan weaving that thread into cloth on their hand-loom, no friendly neighborhood tailor stitching bespoke clothing after fitting that cloth to our individual bodies. Instead, raw materials are sourced globally from big agricultural business, the petrochemical industry and the like, spun into cloth in factories and stitched on assembly lines in other factories where they also undergo:


  • Antimicrobial treatments designed to make them mold- and mildew-resistant during their logistically protracted storage in warehouses and transport across the globe in shipping containers.

  • A variety of chemical treatments that endow value added properties such as wrinkle-resistant (iron-free/permanent press), stain resistant and/or flame-retardant.






    Ever wondered how clothes acquire such properties? They need to be specifically treated with specific chemicals (textile finish resins or durable press resins or permanent press clothing resins) using specific processes (durable press chemical finishes, DPCF) to acquire these properties that many of us customers now simply expect as a matter of convenience from the textile industry. From the wearer's health and safety point of view, perhaps the most consequential chemical exposure is Formaldehyde, the same carcinogenic cross-linking agent used to embalm bodies.
  • 'Formaldehyde resins have been used to impart wrinkle resistance to clothing fabrics since 1926.' (1)

Cotton, cotton/polyester and wrinkle-resistant linens are typically most subjected to such resin finishes while the amount of formaldehyde such textiles release depends highly on the type of resin and conditions used for the finishing (2, also see below from 3, emphasis mine).


'Natural fibers, especially cotton, are still the most important kinds of fibers because of their numerous advantages such as high tensile strength, good abrasion resistance, high moisture absorption, quick drying and absence of static problems. However, cotton has poor elasticity and resilience, i.e. poor wrinkle recovery property. It is weakened easily by acids and resin chemicals used in finishing processes. In addition, fabrics made from untreated cotton fibers burn easily with a high flame velocity and are prone to being attacked by mildew and bacteria. Reducing wrinkling, flammability and microbial attacks of cotton fiber have been the major challenge facing the textile industry. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the current status of developments in functional finishing of cotton fabrics. Functional finishing agents, especially cross-linking agents, are embedded in cotton fabrics with the aid of acid catalysts, followed by drying and curing at high temperatures. The treated cotton fabrics often suffer from decrease in tensile strength, tear strength, abrasion resistance and sewability with a stiff, harsh and uncomfortable feel. Moreover, chemicals present in finishing agents react in the curing process to form some residues, which may even release free formaldehyde, which is of carcinogenic nature. The amount of formaldehyde remaining in the finished product depends largely on the amount and kind of finishing agents and catalysts used, as well as the curing conditions.'

Further, the source country doesn't appear to influence levels of formaldehyde released from clothes (2), a sign of how truly global textile manufacturing processes have become. Different finished textiles release different amounts of formaldehyde. Specifically, an exhaustive European Commission study from 2007 found (see below from 2):


'...shirts seem to be the category with the highest risk... pure cotton and mixtures containing wool seem to release more formaldehyde than garments made of mixtures containing cotton and other fibers.'

On the other hand (4, see below from 2):


'Domestic washing effectively reduces the level of released formaldehyde'

Obviously, the more washes the greater the reduction. Nevertheless, as David Brookstein, a textile engineer, commented to the New York Times in 2010, we'd be better off if clothes came labeled with 'Wash before wearing' (5).


Legal Restrictions on Textile Formaldehyde Content


Though our own metabolism synthesizes minute quantities of formaldehyde as a matter of course, since clothes are in contact with our skin for extended periods of time, the amount and chronic exposure are the key factors to keep in mind.


While several countries have followed Japan and Finland by imposing restrictions on formaldehyde content in textiles (see below from 6), others such as the US have not.


According to NIST (7), as of June 2016, Minnesota is the only US state to specifically impose a ban on formaldehyde-added children's products.


Contact dermatitis in textile workers and even wearers:


A 2015 study reports, (see below from 8).


'...some chemicals from processing may remain on consumer products. Allergic reactions and irritation of the skin and respiratory tract are the most common harmful effects in workers in the textile industry.'

Sporadic reports from different countries suggest textile-associated Contact dermatitis ranges from ~0.2 to ~11% in different populations, the much higher rates obviously found in textile industry workers (1, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16).
 
Well, we don't know for sure that this is elemental mercury. Might be safe mercury like thiomersal.
Merthiolate is the trade name of thiomersal that was widely used as an antiseptic. Organomecury is still toxic which is why it's not available in the US. Parents used it on their children all the time.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo