New York City's newly released 9/11 records show that asbestos lingered in Lower Manhattan for months while officials weighed their own liability. Twenty-five years later, the latency clock for asbestos-related cancer is only now reaching its peak.
Copyright
Friday, September 11, 2026
Tuesday, August 25, 2026
John Burton's Unfinished Blueprint
The economist who chaired the Nixon Commission set a standard the states still have not met.
Saturday, August 22, 2026
Twin Shields Bar COVID Claim
Sunday, August 16, 2026
Libby Care Dies Quietly
The federal model for occupational disease care collapsed in Montana. Workers’ compensation inherits the wreckage.
Monday, August 10, 2026
The Night Shift Penalty
Wednesday, June 3, 2026
Phones Off, Court On
Monday, May 11, 2026
Invisible Wounds, Visible Costs
The ILO’s 2026 SafeDay Report and What It Means for Workers’ Compensation
Sunday, May 10, 2026
Single Payer’s Workers’ Compensation Gamble
For more than a decade, this blog has tracked what I have called “The Path to Federalization,” the steady, incremental expansion of federal authority over what was once an exclusively state-run workers’ compensation system. From the World Trade Center Health Program in 2010 to the Affordable Care Act’s Libby Care pilot, from Supreme Court validation of the individual mandate in 2012 to the Medicare Secondary Payer offset debate, each chapter has added a new stone to that path. California’s 2026 gubernatorial race is laying the boldest stone yet.
Thursday, July 11, 2024
FTC Report Strikes at the High Cost of Drugs
The US Federal Trade Commission [FTC] report "Pharmacy Benefit Managers: The Powerful Middlemen Inflating Drug Costs and Squeezing Main Street Pharmacies" examines the influence of Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs) in the pharmaceutical industry.
Tuesday, January 30, 2024
Long Overdue Public Safety Worker Coverage
Legislation has been reintroduced to provide workers’ compensation benefits for certain public safety workers who developed an occupational illness or injury flowing from the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. A closer look at the legislation reveals that it removes defenses such as causal relationship, statute of limitations, and jurisdiction. Complicated statutory and regulatory challenges may ultimately offset the benefits offered.
Friday, January 22, 2021
Is the workers' compensation system ready for the COVID-19 [coronavirus] virus? Live Updates
Tuesday, December 29, 2020
OSHA Temporary Emergency COVID Standard on the Horizon
President-elect Joe Biden plans to have OSHA establish an emergency temporary standard to keep workers safe from COVID-19.
Friday, August 23, 2019
White House Contamination Highlights Asbestos Controversy
Tuesday, July 9, 2019
NJ Governor Murphy Signs Legislation to Protect First Responders, Including 9/11 Volunteers
Jon L. Gelman of Wayne NJ is the author of NJ Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thomson-Reuters) and co-author of the national treatise, Modern Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thomson-Reuters). For over 4 decades the Law Offices of Jon L Gelman 1.973.696.7900jon@gelmans.com has been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.
Sunday, May 12, 2019
Limits for Toxic Plastics – No Asbestos Ban
Basel Convention: Countries Take Major Step to Control Plastic Waste Dumping, Stop Major Loophole for Electronic Waste
Today, 187 countries took a major step forward in curbing the plastic waste crisis by adding plastic to the Basel Convention, a treaty that controls the movement of hazardous waste from one country to another. The amendments, originally proposed by Norway, require exporters to obtain the consent of receiving countries before shipping most contaminated, mixed, or unrecyclable plastic waste, providing an important tool for countries in the Global South to stop the dumping of unwanted plastic waste into their country. The decision reflects a growing recognition around the world of the toxic impacts of plastic and the plastic waste trade.
Because the US is not a party to the Convention, the amendments adopted today also act as an export ban on unsorted, unclean, or contaminated plastic waste for the US towards developing countries who are parties to the Convention and not part of the OECD. The amendment will have a similar effect for the EU, a party to the Convention, whose own internal legislation bans exports of waste included under the Convention to developing countries.
“Today’s decision demonstrates that countries are finally catching up with the urgency and magnitude of the plastic pollution issue and shows what ambitious international leadership looks like,” says David Azoulay, Environmental Health Director at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL). “Plastic pollution in general and plastic waste in particular remain a major threat to people and the planet, but we are encouraged by the decision of the Basel Convention as we look to the future bold decisions that will be needed to tackle plastic pollution at its roots, starting with reducing production.”
Countries halted a major loophole that would have allowed the continued export of electronic waste (e-waste), without proper controls. The proposed guidelines describing how e-waste is treated under the Basel Convention would have allowed countries to send equipment for repair without the prior informed consent procedure. The guidelines were ready for adoption, with wide support. The African region, India, and other countries, supported by civil society, raised a red flag about the inclusion of this loophole, and countries chose to continue negotiating the guidelines at the next COP, instead of adopting ineffective guidelines.
Countries established Low POPs Content Levels (LPCLs), which define the amount of POPs at which waste is considered hazardous waste. Under this designation, the waste must be disposed of in a way that destroys or irreversibly transforms its POPs content. LPCLs are key: Higher values mean that dangerous materials can, in practice, be recycled into everyday products, triggering further exposure to very toxic POPs. Mobilizing against very high values proposed by the EU, African countries and other recipient countries of waste managed to resist the extreme pressure from the EU and other developed countries, and obtained the inclusion of lower values together with the higher values proposed by the EU, opening the way for future work to lower the levels of POPs allowed in waste even further.
Parties considered a report on the role of the Basel Convention to regulate waste containing nanomaterials. It recommended the inclusion of certain nano-containing waste under the Basel Convention, and invited further work to identify those wastes that should be covered by the Convention. In a disappointing move, parties adopted a weak decision only requiring the collection of information on national initiatives to address nano-containing waste.
Stockholm Convention: Countries Pass Global Ban on Toxic PFOA
Parties to the Stockholm Convention passed a global ban of PFOA — a suspected carcinogen and endocrine disruptor that has contaminated drinking water in many parts of the world. The Stockholm Convention regulates persistent organic pollutants (POPs), some of the world’s worst chemicals that harm human health and build up in the environment and the body over time.
“While the global ban on PFOA marks an important step forward in protecting the environment and people’s health, we regret that countries undermined the scientific process of the Convention to include unjustified exemptions to the ban,” said Giulia Carlini, Staff Attorney at CIEL.
A number of wide-ranging five-year exemptions were included in the PFOA ban for firefighting foams, medical devices, and fluorinated polymers, among other uses. Though China, the European Union, and Iran participated in the scientific review process, they proposed exemptions that had not undergone scientific review or were reviewed and disqualified by the scientific committee.
“PFOA is one of the world’s worst chemicals, and yet countries have found ways to continue human exposure to its toxic harms. Tellingly, even some industry groups disagreed with some of the exemptions, as there are widely available alternatives to these chemicals,” says Carlini. “Countries’ insistence on including these exemptions — in spite of readily available alternatives and a lack of evidence — reveals a disrespect for the scientific review process at the heart of the Stockholm Convention.”
Rotterdam Convention: Countries Break 15 Years of Gridlock Using Voting Procedure for First Time Ever
In the first-ever vote taken under the Rotterdam Convention, 120 parties to the Stockholm Convention broke through gridlock and disagreement to establish a compliance mechanism for the Convention. The compliance mechanism will allow countries to be held accountable for not respecting their commitments under the Convention. After nearly 15 years of negotiations with little forward movement, countries decided that “all efforts to reach consensus had been exhausted” and opted instead to vote, for the first time in the history of the Convention. The adoption of the new mechanism through a vote means that only those parties in agreement to the provisions will be be subject to this mechanism. A total of 126 Parties voted, of which 120 agreed to the compliance mechanism and only six opposed.
Countries listed hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD), a toxic chemical used as a flame retardant, and phorate, a pesticide that is extremely toxic to humans, under the Rotterdam Convention’s Annex III, meaning that countries must get the prior informed consent of receiving countries in order to export these chemicals.
Unfortunately, countries failed to take action on the five other chemicals up for listing under Annex III of the Convention. In particular, chrysotile asbestos and paraquat, which have been reviewed and identified as chemicals of concerns by the Scientific Chemical Review Committee of the Convention, and have been on the agenda for years. A handful of countries repeatedly blocked the consensus required to list these chemicals under the Convention, undermining the scientific process underlying the Convention.

