Some things should be brought up in private.

[Xanthia, Maker of fine Tin-foil hats since 2007]

OK, I have read all the posts and have thought about this for a few days.

I feel that if the boss said:
" I feel we should not use Solvent X because is causes liver damage, can cause birth defects if a woman handling it is pregnant, should not be handled by those who are immune compromised and causes big purple hairy warts, and we have found that Solvent Y has no such side effects" that would be OK, because no one was specifically pointed out and all side effects were listed.

If the boss had said, "Well CB is a girl and might have a baby, Bob is a drinker and his liver is already in jeopardy, Stan uses IV drugs so he may get HIV any day now and I am too pretty for big hairy purple pimples"  that is wrong.

It is the company's JOB to make people aware of the side effects of the chemicals they handle, but they should not single out any person for this unless they are the only person who will come in contact with it.  There are law suits about this type of thing because it used to because so  any companies did not do this and people died because of it.  I myself am the child of a man who worked which such chemicals in the late sixties and early seventies, he carried them home on his clothes to my pregnant mother and older brother, and I now suffer some of the problems that that chemical causes.

[ShadesOfGrey]

It is the company's JOB to make people aware of the side effects of the chemicals they handle, but they should not single out any person for this unless they are the only person who will come in contact with it.  There are law suits about this type of thing because it used to because so  any companies did not do this and people died because of it. 

well said, Xanthia

[audrey1962]

It is the company's JOB to make people aware of the side effects of the chemicals they handle,

I agree with you. The company is making people aware of side effects by providing MSDS sheets (as required by law). The OP has confirmed that the sheets are available and in fact, she is charge of maintaining them. Therefore, there is absolutely no reason for the boss to have made the comments that he did - especially in front of others.

Whether or not the boss had good intentions is besides the point. How many times have we heard brides say, "I had the best of intentions when I put registry cards in my invites. It would save my guest's the trouble of calling and finding out where we registered." That still doesn't make it right.

I think that part of the reason so many posters are defending the boss is b/c they are not aware of MSDS sheets and their relevance. It is the law that all companies must make these sheets available to employees so that they are aware of the side effects that they are working with.


from:
http://www.ilpi.com/msds/faq/partb.html#history

"The U.S. Government's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is responsible for the Hazard Communication Standard 29 CFR 1910.1200. The purpose of this standard is "to ensure that the hazards of all chemicals produced or imported are evaluated, and that information concerning their hazards is transmitted to employers and employees. This transmittal of information is to be accomplished by means of comprehensive hazard communication programs, which are to include container labeling and other forms of warning, material safety data sheets and employee training."

[LJM]

I'm really surprised how many people are claiming that you're over-reacting 

I don't really have anything to add, since most of the points have already been made, but wow.

[Linley]

The boss said "at the back of my mind, I'm concerned about [Czarina Burrito] working with [solvent]" and to me this implies patronizingly that he believes that she is in need of some special concern because she is a woman and is consequently disparaging of women. Basically he is saying that he doesn't have to worry about the others because they are men, but because she is a woman she needs him to protect her from the solvent. 

[Athos_000]

DH and I were discussing this thread. We came to the conclusion that if boss had given the employees the list of possible problems (liver damage, birth defects, etc) without singling out the OP (afterall she would know more than anyone how to protect herself if birth defects were an issue), then it would have been ok, But how he actually addressed the issue was wrong and the OP might want to pull him aside and discuss it, so it won't happen again.

We both think it is odd that he glossed over the liver issue, since it affects everyone, and focused on the birth defects. Our only guess is that he got so focused in his head about the birth defects and the OP that he sort of lost his grip on things.

[Xanthia, Maker of fine Tin-foil hats since 2007]

It is the company's JOB to make people aware of the side effects of the chemicals they handle,

I agree with you. The company is making people aware of side effects by providing MSDS sheets (as required by law). The OP has confirmed that the sheets are available and in fact, she is charge of maintaining them. Therefore, there is absolutely no reason for the boss to have made the comments that he did - especially in front of others.

Whether or not the boss had good intentions is besides the point. How many times have we heard brides say, "I had the best of intentions when I put registry cards in my invites. It would save my guest's the trouble of calling and finding out where we registered." That still doesn't make it right.

I think that part of the reason so many posters are defending the boss is b/c they are not aware of MSDS sheets and their relevance. It is the law that all companies must make these sheets available to employees so that they are aware of the side effects that they are working with.


from:
http://www.ilpi.com/msds/faq/partb.html#history

"The U.S. Government's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is responsible for the Hazard Communication Standard 29 CFR 1910.1200. The purpose of this standard is "to ensure that the hazards of all chemicals produced or imported are evaluated, and that information concerning their hazards is transmitted to employers and employees. This transmittal of information is to be accomplished by means of comprehensive hazard communication programs, which are to include container labeling and other forms of warning, material safety data sheets and employee training."

I was the keeper of the manual and dealt with all of the OSHA regulations when I worked for a Cruise Line (2 ships in the line), so I agree.  My main point however was that he could have generally listed ALL of the problems with the solvent without saying anything about anyone, or just hand out the sheets and discuss why they were using X instead of Y.  Once names were mentioned or one problem was singled out that would possibly impact the lives of just one of the people, that crossed the line.  So we are actually agreeing, just with different words!

[Sharnita]

Weeks after reading th OP, I have come to wonder if OP misreads what is causing boss to sinle her out. She sommented that before she arrived there were no safety glasses and she made the push to get them. She sounds like she is the voice of safety practices and procedures. I am wondering if at least part of boss singling her out is motivated by him thinking she is "most likely" to turn him in should should safety, particularly hers, be compromised. In other words, could he be saying to himself, "Better make a point of showing OP I'm concerned about her safety because she's a stickler about those things."?

[audrey1962]

I was the keeper of the manual and dealt with all of the OSHA regulations when I worked for a Cruise Line (2 ships in the line), so I agree.  My main point however was that he could have generally listed ALL of the problems with the solvent without saying anything about anyone, or just hand out the sheets and discuss why they were using X instead of Y.  Once names were mentioned or one problem was singled out that would possibly impact the lives of just one of the people, that crossed the line.  So we are actually agreeing, just with different words!

Yes, you're quite right, I do agree completely with you. I apologize if it seemed like I wasn't.