OH Equipment Amendment Surprises Professional Firefighter Group

Columbus, OH (WorkersCompensation.com) – The Ohio Association of Professional Firefighters (OAPFF) and legislators agreed not to make any changes for two years to a recently passed presumptive cancer bill for firefighters.

But it appears some legislators have changed their mind.  

Doug Stern, spokesperson for the OAPFF, said SB 27, a presumptive cancer bill for firefighters, which was passed in January, was signed by Gov. John Kasich and became effective in early April, is now in limbo because of an equipment clause.

Rather than provide firefighters with what they promised, Stern said lawmakers are basing presumptive cancer coverage on whether first responders are properly using their protective equipment. “It sounds pretty reasonable on face value, but it ignores the fact that exposures happen despite the fire gear we wear,” Stern said in an interview with WorkersCompensation.com, adding the heavy-duty coat and pants, helmet and respirator are not what protects firefighters from deadly toxins.

 “The heavy-duty coat is to prevent us from getting burns or cuts and scrapes,” he said. The Columbus Dispatch reported that House Insurance Committee Chairman Rep. Tom Brinkman (R-Cincinnati) said legislators are adding the clause since, “we just want to make sure folks are using the safety equipment that’s provided.”

As Stern noted, The Atlantic reported in 2015 that research confirmed “firefighters’ gear and skin gets coated in higher levels of potentially carcinogenic compounds,” and the “extreme heat helps chemicals enter through the skin: With every 5 degrees that body temperature rises, skin absorption rates increase by as much 400%.”

A reckless disregard for their health is how Rep. Kristin Boggs (D-Columbus) refers to the equipment amendment (as reported in the Columbus Dispatch), but Rep. Brinkman does not. “Not every type of safety equipment needs to be provided to every fire department. But when it’s provided, we want to make sure it’s being used. I think that’s common sense,” he said.  

“The whole premise of this change is nonsensical,” Stern said. The fact that some legislators changed their mind on waiting to make changes really bothers the OAPFF. “We would see what worked and what didn’t. Nobody was going to really change anything fundamental. This bill hadn’t even been in effect for two months and they propose a major bill overhaul. It came way too soon to do that,” he said.  

“But here you have a few legislators, one of whom voted for the bill in committee last time around, and now wants to change the bill,” Stern said of Rep. Brinkman and the amendment. “We want to make sure fire(fighters) wear their gear too. But this has nothing to do with that.” 

Stern said from firefighters to legislators, “we got some pretty passionate people on both sides of the aisle on this one.” One of those men is Rep. Mike Henne (R-Clayton) who said he has issue with the change, according to the Columbus Dispatch. “If your tank runs out of oxygen and you go without a mask for a while, he asked, are you jeopardizing a future claim?” asked the Vice Chairman of the Insurance Panel. “It’s so important that we’re going to allow them to dispute the claims, but some stations don’t even have the equipment.”

Henne said “the bill creates more questions than it does solve problems.”

Stern said it defeats its original purpose. “The gear does not do anything to stop my exposure to toxic carcinogens and other toxins in the air. It still permeates through my gear and gets on my skin, where it then absorbs into my blood stream, and then I am exposed to cancer,” he said.

---

(UPDATE 5/16):

Before the bill passed today, Rep. Brinkman said there was a concern for cost as far as the equipment clause was concerned. “We are talking about a hundred million dollars in firefighter equipment that these firefighters are afraid to have it be known whether they are wearing it or not,” he told WorkersCompensation.com. The House Insurance Committee chairman said the group was working hard to compromise.

“Maybe we will or maybe we won’t, I am ok whether it stays the way it is or it gets amended,” Rep. Brinkman said, noting the bill would move quickly today, specifically moving to the Finance Committee before approval. “They will vote it to the floor and on the final day, Wednesday, we will be voting it off the floor,” he said.

Since the bill passed through the House Insurance Committee earlier this morning, Stern said the OAPFF was content with the change in language. “They took out the language about the ‘improper wearing gear’ as a rebuttable item. They did put in language that allows for a rebuttal if, ‘by preponderance of competent scientific evidence, that the type of carcinogen alleged did not or could not have caused the cancer being alleged,’” he said to WorkersCompensation.com via email. 

Though not ideal, Stern said the firefighters celebrate the amendment. “We are satisfied that the changes, while not perfect, keep the spirit of the Palumbo Act. The law will continue to help Ohio Fire Fighters with occupational cancer,” he said.

Share This Article: