The
nuclear cleanup workers at Fukushima Dai-ichi are inexperienced day laborers
gathered from all over Japan, including minors who are 18 to 19. The
subcontractor system below TEPCO is multi-layered, involving seven
subcontractors in this case. They are given “supposedly blank” resumes
with work experience already filled out. After a one-day seminar on
radiation, some workers are obviously anxious. They are told by one of
the subcontractors that the exposure dose isn’t cumulative and even if they are
exposed to 1 mSv of radiation a day, it will be halved daily, reaching zero in
8 days.
In
February 2012, Tetsuya Hayashi applied for a job repairing the covering for the
reactor 3 building. He was asked to begin work in April 2012.
However, the work was postponed, and he was told in early June that he
could begin work immediately doing the checkout and checkin of equipments as
well as conducting a radiation survey. He was asked to fill out a resume
which was pre-filled with a falsified work experience. He was told that
his actual work was going to involve changing the agitator inside a
decontaminating machine by Areva, a French company, in a high radiation area.
He was told that APD (alarm pocket dosimeter) was going to be set for 6
to 9 mSv and 5 alarms would mean 9 mSv. He will switch with someone else
after 3 alarms, which means the actual work time will be 5 to 10 minutes.
He asked them about the high radiation level, and he was told it was fine
because 1 mSv exposure would be halved daily, becoming zero in 8 days. He was
told that everyone was exposed to about that much radiation.
He and other workers complained, and they were given a different work. On June 19, 2012, he removed glass pieces so that a new pipe can be put into the reactor building. He complained to his immediate supervisor about the discrepancy in job description. After work he was called to one of the subcontractors and reprimanded for complaining to a higher-level subcontractor without going through the appropriate channel. He was unfairly dismissed. There were 4 to 5 layers of subcontractors between him and the actual employer, and kickbacks were taken out of his wages…..
He and other workers complained, and they were given a different work. On June 19, 2012, he removed glass pieces so that a new pipe can be put into the reactor building. He complained to his immediate supervisor about the discrepancy in job description. After work he was called to one of the subcontractors and reprimanded for complaining to a higher-level subcontractor without going through the appropriate channel. He was unfairly dismissed. There were 4 to 5 layers of subcontractors between him and the actual employer, and kickbacks were taken out of his wages…..
No comments:
Post a Comment