Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Medicine

Delta, Alaska, and American Airlines Have All Been Sued Over Their Uniforms. (vox.com) 99

Posted by msmash from the illness-inducing-uniforms dept.
Rashes, blisters, and hair loss have all been reported. So has vomiting, migraines, and shortness of breath. All of these -- and more -- are symptoms reported by flight attendants after their airlines got new uniforms. But no one knows why. From a report: Delta is the latest airline to have flight attendants report health issues possibly related to their uniforms, and employees at the airline filed a lawsuit in May against the manufacturer, Lands' End. But flight attendants have been battling health issues that have appeared after an airline instituted new uniforms for years. And for years, airlines have said their uniforms are safe. Meanwhile, flight attendants and others are working to discover the cause of their symptoms and the identity and total number of chemicals present in their uniforms, all of which can be difficult to ascertain. Until the cause can be identified -- or until airlines start listening to employees and moving quickly after their complaints -- it's likely employees will continue to face symptoms. And it's likely that flight attendants will keep heading to court, where they've historically needed to go to get policy changed by their employers.

The problem was first reported after employees at Alaska Airlines got new uniforms toward the end of 2010 and beginning of 2011. Flight attendants began to report rashes and eye irritation, and documented hives, blisters, and scaly patches, according to a 2012 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) report looking into the issue. In 2013, flight attendants at Alaska Airlines filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the uniforms, Twin Hill, and the airline recalled the uniforms in 2014. In October 2016, Twin Hill won the lawsuit, with the court claiming there was no reliable evidence the injuries were caused by the uniforms.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Delta, Alaska, and American Airlines Have All Been Sued Over Their Uniforms. More

Delta, Alaska, and American Airlines Have All Been Sued Over Their Uniforms.

Comments Filter:

  • LOL (Score:2, Insightful)

    by sexconker ( 1179573 )

    Vox is still around?

    I'll save you the trouble - it's bogus.

    In 2013, flight attendants at Alaska Airlines filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the uniforms, Twin Hill, and the airline recalled the uniforms in 2014. In October 2016, Twin Hill won the lawsuit, with the court claiming there was no reliable evidence the injuries were caused by the uniforms.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jythie ( 914043 )
      Unsurprisingly, trans national corporations tend to be better at handling the legal system than a bunch of overworked flight attendants.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by geekoid ( 135745 )

      Then in 2016, shortly after flight attendants at American Airlines got new uniforms, also manufactured by Twin Hill, they began to show symptoms as well. Flight attendants reported rashes, blisters, open sores, and swelling. According to a 2018 NIOSH report appendix, there were no skin disorder complaints in the company’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration logs in 2015 — before the new uniforms. In 2016, there were 87 skin disorder entries, and 83 of those were reported to be related

      • The real question is whether this is a real effect or a a nocebo effect. Once one person reports the new uniform makes people sick, then anything happening to anyone might be attributed to the new uniform and it can even cause new real and physical symptoms to appear.

        Nocebo mass delusion [theness.com] is an mindblowing phenomenon. Not saying this is what's happening here, just that is has to be part of the options until further investigation is done.

  • Dry-Cleaning chemicals? (Score:3)

    by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @05:00PM (#58941692)

    I wonder if most of these issues could be traced back to chemicals used in cleaning the uniforms, wouldn't all of them be dry-cleaned?

    It seems like if you wear normal store clothing you'd be exposed to pretty much the same materials that go into uniforms...

    • Re:Dry-Cleaning chemicals? (Score:4, Informative)

      by iggymanz ( 596061 ) on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @05:19PM (#58941804)

      No, many unique things be used to make or process clothing that can cause contact dermatitis, and there are a few the are NOTORIOUS for doing so:

      formaldehyde can be used in finishing

      various types of rubbers and reagents used vulcanize them including "mercapto mix" (itself made of a few things that can cause reactions) and other sulphur compounds

        any of various pigments including cobalt, potassium dichromate, and in particular Disperse Blue 106 and 124

      • various types of rubbers and reagents used vulcanize them including "mercapto mix"

        I'm not saying there are not things in clothing finishing that cannot cause some irritation, but I am thinking most people would be exposed to many of those things also just through the process of buying normal clothing yet that is not causing irritation...

        So I am wondering what it is about the uniforms that differs, to me it seems like the element that would be more significant is that uniforms are dry-cleaned very regularly

        • There are dozens of compounds used with rubber alone, and perhaps the cheapest supplier/bidder (not necessarily a Chinese one, but they've been known in the past to commit the sin) may have used something not normally used (or even legally allowed)

        • Normal clothing have consumer protections if they use harmful chemicals.

          Uniforms sold to businesses do not.

          This is exactly the sort of thing you need to worry about when buying any sort of business tool. You can't just assume that it has the same safety conditions as retail items.

          There are lots of really noxious chemicals that make clothes wrinkle-free or prevents stains. This is exactly the sort of symptoms that you should look for with this clear risk.

        • Re:Dry-Cleaning chemicals? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Lanthanide ( 4982283 ) on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @06:27PM (#58942142)

          Except these aren't every-day clothes, they're work clothes that need to be durable and long-lasting, easy to clean and not get creases etc. Furthermore I would not be surprised if there were safety regulations around airline employee uniform fabric as well, in terms of standing up to fires at least.

          Those factors could easily result in chemicals or manufacturing processes that differ from regular commercial clothing.

        • I mean, it could have just been one shipment with a little extra pesticide spilled on it accidentally.

        • Re:Dry-Cleaning chemicals? (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Falconhell ( 1289630 ) on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @09:51PM (#58943156) Journal

          We had exactly this issue with brand new ambulance paramedic and police uniforms in South Australia. The problems started at first use, even before any cleaning.
          It occoured regardless of being dry cleaned or not. All the uniforms were pulled and replaced. Chemical residues in the clothing were the cause.
          https://www.adelaidenow.com.au... [adelaidenow.com.au]

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      I wonder if most of these issues could be traced back to chemicals used in cleaning the uniforms, wouldn't all of them be dry-cleaned?

      Uniforms are typically made to be not dry-clean only. Because it's a daily wear item, and dry cleaning is fairly expensive all in for daily wear items. Plus, if you need to wash them on the go, you'd have to find a dry cleaners.

      So you'd have everyone washing their uniforms in their own laundry with their own detergents that they probably tolerate just fine.

      Though, it could be

  • At least they have an union and FAA mandates (Score:3)

    by Joe_Dragon ( 2206452 ) on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @05:07PM (#58941758)

    At least they have an union and FAA mandates so they have the power to shut things down if needed.

  • Viscose caused rashes (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I've had rashes when wearing Viscose fabric clothing for three different clothing articles. Viscose is made by chemically breaking down bamboo into fibers which are then woven together to make thread.

    Stopped wearing viscose and the rashes went away.

  • Are the uniforms required to be flame resistant? Those chemicals might do it.

    • Yeah, I'm scratching my head over the possible cause of this as well. It's not as if the American service industry in general has had this problem. Why would service industry types on a plane be outfitted differently?

      • They might have been trying something new.

        For example, I imagine wrinkle and stain resistance would be beneficial for people that have to start half of their workdays out of a random hotel.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by jythie ( 914043 )
          Another possibility is that there is a single source supplying a bunch of airlines and not currently producing uniforms for other industries, so it might be a problem with a particular company or upstream supplier of some type.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by jythie ( 914043 )
        In the piece they cite several possible reasons why flight attendants would be particularly vulnerable to some kind of contaminate. Besides the long hours and broken circadian rhythms (which screw with immune systems), they are also spending large amounts of time in a pressurized can with recycled air. They are not unique in any particular element, but the combination could mean they would show symptoms sooner and in larger numbers than people in other industries that have the same fabrics.

    • Contact dermatitis (Score:5, Informative)

      by jhecht ( 143058 ) on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @06:57PM (#58942328)
      This may be a problem called contact dermatitis, an effect similar to an allergy. It's an innate sensitivity to a substance that increases with exposure and only affects certain people. It also is called sensitive skin, or eczema because it causes inflammation, cracked skin and rashes. I get it from skin contact with detergents, solvents, and acidic foods. Poison ivy causes inflammation and itching in most humans, but not in other animals. Uniforms might have some chemicals left behind from cleaning, or from things like flame retardants. It may take a while to figure out the specific chemical and chain of events, but it's a plausible hypothesis.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      Are the uniforms required to be flame resistant? Those chemicals might do it.

      Not generally. But there are flame resistant materials available - the problem with chemical based flame resistance is it wears out. This is fine if it's something that's not likely to be washed often (e.g., outerwear). In general, things like flame resistant jackets and such that were chemically treated last around 15 washes or so before the chemical is washed away. So you don't want to use it on a daily wear item or you'd be repl

  • Maybe they were manufactured in the Dominican, where another unknown cause is making tourists ill, and sometimes terminal.

  • We had a couple of incidents of this:
    police uniforms in 2012: https://www.adelaidenow.com.au... [adelaidenow.com.au]

    and ambulance officer uniforms in 2015: https://www.abc.net.au/news/20... [abc.net.au]

    Unfortunately nothing printed as to what actually happened, but I know with the ambulance uniforms just went back to wearing their old uniforms until it was sorted.

  • Were the uniforms or their fabrics imported from China or another non-Western country with low ethical standards?

    The toxicity of the uniforms recalls the toxicity of drywall. A report [npr.org] by NPR states, " Between 2004 and 2007, an estimated 100,000 homes in more than 20 states were built with toxic drywall imported from China. Emissions from the drywall corrode plumbing and electrical systems. Homeowners also blame them for headaches and respiratory ailments."

  • Possibly a vapor-point issue . . . (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Gnostic Teflon ( 2916253 ) <tekavant@yahoo.com> on Thursday July 18, 2019 @12:26AM (#58943724)

    Possibly a vapor-point issue. These people wear synthetic or partly synthetic fabrics that may possibly contain solvents which pose no problem at ground level, but in a pressurized-fuselage environment where the pressure is lower than what it is at, say, 10,000 feet, may be below the vapor point of residual solvents and plasticizers. Something for the lawyers to have a look at.

    • This is an excellent point. Even if the emissions from the fabric don't present a problem for an occasionally air traveler, someone who has to wear the same fabric day in day out would have a much greater exposure.
    • Not my field of expertise, but I don't think that's how vapor point works. My understanding is that there's evaporation and condensation going on at all times, and that it's independent for each chemical considered. The vapor point for a particular temperature is the partial pressure at which the chemical evaporates as fast as it condenses, and would be independent of other partial pressures such as of oxygen and nitrogen.

  • Insect sprays (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I love how nobody actually points out that spraying insect repellant all over the cabin by the crew attendants at the beginning of each flight may also cause that effect. Every single flight. Can you imagine the total exposure to the stuff? But no, something that kills bugs is of course totally harmless to humans, even when used daily or several times per day. Sure, let's blame the clothing.

  • before wearing them? To get rid of the loose dyes, excess anti-wrinkle stuff (sorry to get technical), and so forth?

Slashdot Top Deals

E = MC ** 2 +- 3db

Close