UNIFOR Campaign
UNIFO
R
NT CANCER
E
V
E
C
R
GN
PAI
AM
P
Prevent Cancer
P
UNIFO
R
GN
PAI
AM
NT CANCER
VE
C
RE
INTRODUCTION
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 3
MESSAGE
LEWENZA
ANDPETER
PETERKENNEDY
KENNEDY
MESSAGEFROM
FROMKEN
JERRY
DIAS
AND
As a union we understand the need to
identify what diseases and other illnesses
are originating from within our workplaces.
We are well aware of the fact that at least
one quarter of our lives is spent in the
workplace. So, by finding out what causes
cancer, we can reduce or eliminate these
chemical exposures in the workplace as well
as what is emitted into our environment.
JerryLewenza
Dias
Ken
President
We have a long way to go in the fight to rid
our workplaces and environment of the
thousands of potential cancer causing
chemicals we come into contact with every
day.
Collectively, we need to demand that
politicians implement strong, enforceable
regulations that protect us in the workplace,
protect our environment and ultimately
protect our health.
Can cancer really be beaten? We believe
the answer is yes! We can beat this disease
the same way we have won all of our battles
– by drawing a line in the sand as we
continue to defend our members and their
families by demanding a better life for all
Canadians
Thank you, sisters and brothers for your
activism and solidarity on this important
issue.
Peter Kennedy
Secretary-Treasurer
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 5
P
UNIFO
R
GN
PAI
AM
NT CANCER
VE
C
RE
A HISTORIC FIGHT
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 7
The CAW initiative
CAW Launches Environmental Fightback - 1996
It began in early 1996, frustrated with continual cuts to environmental regulations and
a steady attack on workers rights by the Ontario Tory government, the CAW Windsor
Regional Environment Council, in conjunction with the CAW National office launches a
campaign aimed at educating and organizing the citizens of Ontario to challenge the
then Harris government on his regressive policies to human health.
The fightback campaign which ultimately demanded environmental protection with a
spotlight on cancer prevention was titled “Environmental Deregulation, a Recipe for
Cancer.”
Bud Jimmerfield - 1997
At CAW Council in December 1997, Bud Jimmerfield – tireless health, safety and
environment and workers' compensation activist and President of CAW Local 89 gave
a moving address to our delegates. He only had a few months left to live. Bud was a
machinist for 31 years and was exposed every working day to cancer causing
metalworking fluids at an auto parts plant in Amherstberg, Ontario. He contracted
esophageal cancer in 1996 and died 18 months later at age 49, leaving his wife Diane
and eight children.
In his December 1997 speech, Bud charged delegates with an important responsibility
- don't mourn my death, fight for the living and do your best to try to prevent future
occupational diseases, death and injuries from occurring.
Every year following Bud’s challenge, CAW Council has offered the Bud Jimmerfield
Award to give recognition to eligible health, safety, environment or workers'
compensation activists. These activists must have shown leadership in helping fellow
workers and participated in activities beyond their workplace that do their best to
prevent future occupational diseases, death and injuries.
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
4
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 9
CAW National Campaign - 1998
By mid 1998 CAW union launched a major Prevent Cancer Campaign initiative.
The campaign launch was followed by holding three major national conferences on
the issue of cancer prevention, one each in the fields of occupational health,
environmental health, and workers' compensation as well as regional conferences on
the same themes from Nova Scotia to British Columbia. With the assistance of the
Occupational Health Clinics for Ontario Workers (OHCOW), we published a large
compendium of known carcinogens with strategies for their elimination from
workplaces.
The Workers Health and Safety Centre produced two videos on occupational and
environmental cancers, “Before Their Time” and “They Speak in Whispers” which
were shown at CAW conferences and which we mailed out to Local Unions across the
country, where they raised awareness at our membership meetings for the need to
grapple with this enormous but critical issue of cancer prevention.
As well, CAW continued to meet with employers to plan strategies regarding how to
analyze workplace substances to determine whether they contain carcinogens and
how to eliminate them, once discovered. These meetings where held with joint health
and safety committees as well as joint environment meetings at the workplace level,
as well as meetings at the corporate (national) level. We continue today to advocate
for the elimination of carcinogens from coast to coast in workplaces as diverse as
airline reservation offices to underground mines.
In our auto and auto parts plants we have eliminated carcinogenic solvents and metal
cleaners such as methylene chloride and trichloroethylene with safer substitutes and
processes.
CAW met with government officials from the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of
Environment, the Ministry of Labour, including the Minister himself, and the Workplace
Safety and Insurance Board to impress upon them the importance of taking effective
legislative, regulatory and policy action to prevent cancer and to compensate those
who unfortunately have contracted cancer as a result of their work.
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
10 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
5
It is now 16 years later – Are We Winning?
The work of our union activists has made some great strides in cancer prevention but
with every success there always seems to be another challenge to the protection of
human health in this ever changing industrial world.
The World Health Organization estimates that 70 to 90 percent of all cancers are
caused by exposure to cancer causing agents that are preventable. This statement
should dispel the popular myth that “everything these days causes cancer”. This
defeatist attitude only serves to complicate and impede the goal of preventive action.
The statistics below tell a sobering story of the far reaching arms of cancer and the
sometimes deadly consequences.
These statistics may frighten you, but they should also move you to action. All of these
statistics can be found at: www.cancer.ca
Our determination to act, our determination to demand action from our politicians can
make a difference.
Your commitment to making this campaign work can save someone from being one of
the statistics!!
So, let’s take a look at how are we fairing on the war against cancer from then until
now.
Canadian Cancer Statistics – 1996
The National Cancer Institute of Canada offered the following cancer statistics. An
estimated 129,200 new cases of cancer and 61,800 deaths from cancer will
occur in 1996.
The most frequently diagnosed cancers will be breast cancer for women and prostate
cancer for men.
Canadian 1996 population index was: 28,847,000
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
6
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 11
Canadian Cancer Statistics – 2012
The National Cancer Institute of Canada offered the following cancer statistics. In
2012, approximately 186,400 new cases of cancer and 75,700 deaths from
cancer will occur in 2012.
On average, 500 Canadians will be diagnosed with cancer every day.
On average, 200 Canadians will die of cancer every day.
While cancer is primarily a disease that affects Canadians aged 50 and older, it can
occur at all ages.

Lung, prostate, breast and colorectal cancer are the 4 most common cancer
types (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer) in Canada and account for over
50% of all new cancer cases.

Lung cancer accounts for over a quarter (27%) of all cancer deaths each year.

Breast cancer accounts for over a quarter (28%) of new cancer cases in
women.

Prostate cancer accounts for over a quarter (27%) of new cancer cases in men.
Probability of developing or dying from cancer;

An estimated 2 out of 5 Canadians is expected to develop cancer during
their lifetimes
(40% of Canadian women and 45% of men).

An estimated 1 out of every 4 Canadians is expected to die from cancer
(24% of Canadian women and 29% of men).
Canadian 2012 population index was: 34,800,000
THE COMPARISON BETWEEN 1996 TO 2012 REPRESENTS A 44% INCREASE IN CANCER
INCIDENCE AND A 22% INCREASE IN DEATHS
WHILE
THE COMPARISON BETWEEN POPULATION GROWTH FROM 1996 TO 2012 REPRESENTS AN
INCREASE OF ONLY 20 %
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
12 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
7
Today,
Cancer is the leading cause of premature death
Ten leading causes of death, Canada, 2009
number
rank
%
71,125
Cancer
1
Diseases of heart
Cerebrovascular diseases
2
3
Chronic lower respiratory diseases
Accidents
Diabetes
Alzheimer's disease
Influenza and pneumonia
Suicide
Kidney disease
Other
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Total, All causes of death
...
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
49,271
14,105
10,859
29.8%
20.7%
5.9%
10,250
6,923
6,281
5,826
3,890
3,609
56,279
4.6%
4.3%
2.9%
2.6%
2.4%
1.6%
1.5%
23.6%
238,418
100.0%
8
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 13
P
UNIFO
R
GN
PAI
AM
NT CANCER
VE
C
RE
CANCER
PREVENTION
INITIATIVES
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 15
CANCER PREVENTION INITIATIVES

CAW Launches the National Prevent Cancer Campaign

Devil of a Poison – Cancer Prevention Awareness

Personal Chemical Exposure Journal

40 Hour Toxic Substances in the Workplace Course

CAW Ban Asbestos Resolution - Member of Ban Asbestos Canada

CAW Ban Cosmetic Pesticides Resolution

CAW Resolution in Opposition to Waste Incineration

Consultations with Ontario Government on Toxic Use Reductions
Act and Regulations

Member of the Toronto Cancer Prevention Coalition

Member of Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment
(CAPE)

Member of Blue Green Alliance Canada
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
10
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 17
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 19
20 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 21
22 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 23
BAN ASBESTOS RESOLUTION
DECEMBER 2003
WHEREAS:
The International Labour Organization estimates that 100,000 workers die per year from cancer
caused by asbestos and unknown tens of thousands of other workers are dying from asbestosis
and other asbestos related diseases, and
WHEREAS:
Canada is the world's second biggest exporter of chrysotile asbestos, and
WHEREAS:
Canada exports to the developing world where there are poor, if any, safeguards for the use of
asbestos, and
WHEREAS:
The Canadian government promotes the sale of asbestos to these countries by financing the
Asbestos Institute, a Canadian based organization which has been lobbying for increased
asbestos use around the world since the mid-1980's.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the CAW call on the Canadian Government to ban
the export of asbestos; withdraw its financial and political support from
the Asbestos Institute; work with the unions and communities involved
to ensure a just transition for workers in the asbestos mines and
surrounding communities and lobby for a world wide ban on the use of
asbestos, and
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED: That the CAW works to ensure all asbestos in CAW
workplaces be removed and replaced with safe substitutes.
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 25
BAN PESTICIDE USE RESOLUTION
DECEMBER 2004
WHEREAS:
Pesticides contain carcinogens and other toxics that are dangerous to human life (particularly
children) and animal life; and
WHEREAS:
A recent survey, conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, found that
the body of the average American contained traces of 13 weed and bug killers and that all
children born in recent years had DDT residues; and
WHEREAS:
More and more municipalities across the country are eliminating or restricting the use of
pesticides; and
WHEREAS:
CAW educational programs advocate the elimination or reduction of pesticide use; and
WHEREAS:
The CAW distributes a fact sheet on pesticides but has no formal policy on eliminating the use
of pesticides; and
WHEREAS:
The Pesticides Literature Review released by the Ontario College of Family Physicians in April,
2004, recommends that everyone should reduce exposure to all pesticides; and
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the CAW develop, debate and adopt a policy paper on the elimination of
pesticide use as soon as possible; and
FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED: That the CAW develop, debate and adopt a policy paper on the elimination of
pesticide use on CAW properties as soon as possible; and
FINALLY BE IT RESOLVED: That CAW members will work within their communities to eliminate pesticide use
and/or will work with community groups to eliminate pesticide use.
26 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
OPPOSE INCINERATION RESOLUTION
DECEMBER 2007
WHEREAS
building a waste incinerator encourages the building of more waste incinerators as they need a minimum
amount of rubbish to operate. To meet demand, local authorities are abandoning recycling and waste
reduction plants; and
WHEREAS
even incinerators that generate electricity aren’t an energy-saving option. The energy used to produce
the product will get lost anyway and only a fraction of the intrinsic energy content of the materials will
be recovered. Recycling saves far more energy because it means making less new things from raw
materials; and
WHEREAS
one of the most insidious aspects of incineration is the entirely new and highly toxic chemicals that can
be formed during the combustion process. When fragments of partially burned waste chemicals
recombine within incinerator furnaces, smokestacks and/or pollution control devices, hundred, even
thousands, of new substances are created, many of which are more toxic than the original waste itself,
during the combustion process; and
WHEREAS
waste incinerators cause pollution, a wide variety of adverse health effects including cancer, respiratory
disease, disruption of the endocrine system and congenital birth defects, according to scientific studies,
surveys by community groups and local physicians. Studies indicate that distant populations can be
exposed to pollution from incinerators by ingesting contaminated plant or animal products. The costs to
society of these adverse health effects are rarely included in economic analyses and are indeed difficult
to quantify but should not be ignored; and
WHEREAS
incineration actually perpetuates the use of landfills because of the large quantities of leftover ash
produced by incinerators. It is estimated that for every three tons of waste that is incinerated, one ton of
ash is generated. And, this ash is very toxic, containing concentrated amounts of heavy metals and
dioxins which, when buried, will eventually leach into the soil, potentially polluting groundwater; and
WHEREAS
the CAW Campaign for Extended Producer Responsibility will suffer negative impacts due to
incinerators taking away the incentive and pressure for corporations to redesign their products and
packaging to reduce toxics and conserve resources. On the other hand, community efforts into waste
separation reuse and repair, recycling and composting can create more jobs, both in the handling of the
waste and in secondary industries using recovered material; and
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that CAW Local 1520 reaffirms its position of opposition to the principle of waste
incineration; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be forwarded to CAW Council for support.
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 27
Annual Bud Jimmerfield Award Recipients
1999 - Jim Campbell, Local 195
2000 - Hector McLellan, Local 27
2001 - Jim Mahon, Local 1520 ……………2001 - Dick Martin, CLC
2002 - Bob Bourrier, Local 100
2003 - Ken Bondy, Local 200
2004 - Karen Willsey, Local 2168
2005 - Jamie Wright, Local 88
2006 - Dave Renaud, Local 222
2007 - Gary Parent, Local 444
2008 - Wayne Butler, Local 20
2009 - Gord Piper, Local 114
2010 - Nadia Anton-Collins, Local 707
2011 - Garry Gray, Local 636
2012 - Susan Markus, Local 1859
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
19
The CEP Initiative
A fight with Ma Bell
The cancer fight between the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of
Canada and Bell Canada was a big one that started in Hamilton Ontario.
Bell Canada is not a company known for its generosity or sensitivity, particularly when
it comes to dealing with its female employees. In the ten years after CEP was formed,
the company spent millions on lawyers to avoid paying women what it owed them in
pay equity adjustments. The Hamilton cancer cluster is further evidence of just how
mean-spirited Bell can be.
Three Bell coworkers Trish Balon, Lorna Wilson and Maureen Steeves were all
premenopausal women that contracted breast cancer, Early in 1996, around the time
Lorna underwent a mastectomy and started chemotherapy, she and Trish and Maureen
applied for workers’ compensation. They argued that their breast cancer was caused
by low levels of radiation in their workplace. They said that, contrary to the opinion
of the expert that the employer brought in, having so many people get sick had to be
more than a coincidence. The epidemiologist had acknowledged that the incidence of
cancer on the third floor was, statistically, ten times higher than it should have been.
The women’s research told them that pre-menopausal women in Canada had one
chance in sixty of getting breast cancer. Yet here they were, three women on their
floor with the disease. What’s more, none of them came from families with histories of
women having breast cancer.
They were particularly concerned about the specific
effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and the growing
evidence from public health activists who argued that
the increasing levels of chemicals and radiation in
the environment might have something to do with the
increasing incidence of breast cancer. Had there been
other cancer clusters in other Bell workplaces? Could it
really be just a coincidence? In all, six cases of breast
cancer had been diagnosed among sixty workers, along
with cancers of the brain and colon.
The months rolled by. Ontario’s Workplace Safety and
Insurance Board turned down their compensation claim
on the grounds that the scientific literature did not prove
conclusively “at this time” that EMFs caused breast
cancer. The months turned into years. Maureen would
Maureen Steeves
not live to see her claim validated. She died in October
1997. Trish, the most vocal of the trio, “the mouth,” died in November 1999. By 2002
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 29
Lorna was still appealing
the WSIB’s decision not
to recognize the trio’s
compensation claim. CEP
was still paying her legal
bills and bringing in experts
to support the case that
there is a link between
EMFs exposure and cancer.
While Lorna Wilson has
no way of proving without
a doubt that she and Trish
and Maureen and Trish’s
union are right – and the
billion-dollar company is
Lorna Wilson and Trish Balon receive the
wrong – she knows of one
Clifton Grant Award for cancer prevention.
thing that happened that
Windsor, Ont., May 9, 1998.
casts a shadow over Bell’s
claim that the illnesses
were a coincidence, mere bad luck. The place was stripped to the bare concrete.
“Everything is black,” said Lorna. “No lighting, no ceiling, no floors, no walls. And it’s
been empty ever since. It’s never been reused.”
As a community action, CEP activists created a group called the Safe Electromagnetic
Environment Committee (SEEC). The purpose was to provide information to schools
so they could identify high EMF locations and take corrective action to ensure a healthy
working environment for the teachers and children. The Hamilton-Wentworth School
Board was the first to agree to work with them.
Another major issue for SEEC was the Computers for Schools Program. The program
would take used office equipment from government and industry and donate it to
schools. SEEC was concerned that the equipment was not being tested for EMF
exposure levels before being given to children. The members of SEEC requested that
everyone take a look at the computer situations within your children’s schools and
ask the school to observe the one metre apart recommendation. Also observing the
importance of making sure that computers are never placed back to back.
30 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
CEP Occupational Exposure Recognition in Sarnia
Sarnia is a town with a nasty legacy of industrial disease. The people not only live with
the lingering fear of benzene and asbestos but also worry about the consequences
of speaking out about those fears. Despite a legacy of job-related health problems,
workers are accustomed to the neglect of paternalistic companies and delays from
government. After the industrial disease specialists of the Occupational Health Clinic
for Ontario Workers moved to Sarnia from Windsor, they succeeded in helping to win
huge compensation awards for the men who had worked at the slaughterhouse that
was the Holmes Foundry.
In the 1950s asbestos levels at the foundry were 6,720 times the standard that would
finally be set thirty years later. It can take decades for government to recognize that
people are dying from their jobs. It can take years for compensation claims to crawl
through the system. It can be frustrating for trade unionists trying to bring these issues
to public attention.
Some time after the CEP/OHCOW compensation clinic had made it clear that the
former Fiberglas workers were getting sick, CEP’s Ontario vice-president Cec
Makowski was sitting in the media studio at Queen’s Park.
A single journalist had turned up for a press conference that CEP had called to
publicize the delays in getting compensation for Fiberglas workers. Clearly, industrial
disease was not as newsworthy as wilderness preservation. It was disgusting that an
issue of this importance wasn’t attracting attention.”
As he passed the office tower that houses the provincial labour ministry, CEP had an
idea. Several months later, just as the workday started, Jean Simpson and some of
the other widows who had formed the Victims of Chemical Valley found themselves
getting off the elevator at 400 University Avenue with a group of CEP activists. Jean
had a card with the number of a lawyer in her hand. When the official in the office of
Labour Minister Jim Flaherty saw the group coming, he locked the door. The CEP
people promptly sat down in the corridor, in front of the elevators. For a brief moment
the women were left standing there, until Jean said to them, “We’d better sit down too.
It looks like we’re going to be here for a while.”
As the hours passed it became obvious that Flaherty, the man who later became
known for proposing jail as the solution to homelessness, would be avoiding the
office that day. The occupation lasted until the government agreed to meet with the
protestors and hear their demands for a speedier resolution of the Workplace Safety
and Insurance Board claims.
Sometimes direct action is the best way to get the attention of the employer, or the
bankers, or the premier.
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 31
P
UNIFO
R
GN
PAI
AM
NT CANCER
VE
C
RE
Identifying
Carcinogens in the
Workplace and the
Environment
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 33
Carcinogens in the Workplace and the Environment
Although the exact proportion of all cancers due to environmental and occupational
exposures are the subject of debate, it is clear that the risk can be high among people
who are exposed to these carcinogens and that these cancers are therefore
preventable.
Despite years of demands from our union and many other social organizations, the
prevention of occupational and environmental exposures associated with cancer has
received limited attention in the area of research and public policy. Instead, the focus
has remained on the issues of tobacco use, lack of exercise, and poor nutrition. We
call these the “shame and blame you” approach to cancer prevention.
In the course of our lifetimes almost all Canadians will encounter exposures to
carcinogens either in their workplace or through our environment via contaminated air,
water, soil, or food.
Identifying the actual number of cancers caused by occupational or environmental
exposures are difficult for a number of reasons. With rare exceptions, such as
mesothelioma (exposure to asbestos), cancers with different causes look the same.
It is now recognized the great majority of cancers have multiple causes, such as a
combination of genetic, lifestyle, occupational and environmental factors.
Most cancers develop slowly, often decades after a person was exposed and the risk
of cancer increases with the level and length of exposure, which can often be very
difficult to identify especially when the important events occurred far in the past.
So, it is important for us to recognize that eliminating the exposure to even one
carcinogen may significantly reduce the prospect of developing cancer.
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
21
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 35
Identifying Carcinogens
Various chemicals and compounds have been evaluated for their ability to cause
cancer by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the World
Health Organization. These chemicals and compounds are classified into different
groups: those that are known to cause cancer in humans (Group 1), those that
probably cause cancer in humans (Group 2A) those that possibly cause cancer in
humans (Group 2B), those that cannot be classified (Group 3) and those that are
probably not carcinogenic (Group 4). IARC, and the United States National Toxicology
Program, both publish lists of chemicals and compounds that are carcinogenic.
These two programs set the international standard for the identification of
carcinogens, those substances that are known to cause cancer given up-to-date
scientific knowledge. In this report, all substances referred to as carcinogens are listed
as either IARC Group 1 or Group 2A (Table1).
As authoritative as they are, however, these lists are not exhaustive because they
contain information only on those substances that have been evaluated. Of the
thousands of chemicals and compounds either naturally occurring or in commercial
use, we do not have sufficient knowledge about the potential hazards of these
chemicals. The U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health estimates
that less than 2 per cent of the chemicals in commerce have been tested for
carcinogenicity.
Moreover, chemicals and compounds are continually being added or moved from list
to list, as our understanding of their carcinogenicity improves. Most recently IARC
added Diesel Exhaust to its list of known human carcinogens, as some years earlier
the list had grown to include formaldehyde, wood dust, nickel compounds, beryllium
and oral contraceptives, among others.
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
36 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
22
International Agency for Research on Cancer - Known human
carcinogens
Group 1: Carcinogenic to humans

Acetaldehyde (from consuming alcoholic beverages)
Acid mists, strong inorganic
Aflatoxins
Alcoholic beverages
Aluminum production
4-Aminobiphenyl
Areca nut
Aristolochic acid (and plants containing it)
Arsenic and inorganic arsenic compounds
Asbestos (all forms) and mineral substances (such as talc or vermiculite) that contain
asbestos
Auramine production
Azathioprine
Benzene
Benzidine and dyes metabolized to benzidine
Benzo[a]pyrene
Beryllium and beryllium compounds
Betel quid, with or without tobacco
Bis(chloromethyl)ether and chloromethyl methyl ether (technical-grade)
Busulfan
1,3-Butadiene
Cadmium and cadmium compounds

Chlorambucil

Chlornaphazine

Chromium (VI) compounds

Clonorchis sinensis (infection with)

Coal, indoor emissions from household combustion

Coal gasification

Coal-tar distillation

Coal-tar pitch

Coke production

Cyclophosphamide

Cyclosporine
Diethylstilbestrol





















CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
23
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 37


































Engine exhaust, diesel
Epstein-Barr virus (infection with)
Erionite
Estrogen postmenopausal therapy
Estrogen-progestogen postmenopausal therapy (combined)
Estrogen-progestogen oral contraceptives (combined) (Note: There is also convincing
evidence in humans that these agents confer a protective effect against cancer in the
endometrium and ovary)
Ethanol in alcoholic beverages
Ethylene oxide
Etoposide
Etoposide in combination with cisplatin and bleomycin
Fission products, including strontium-90
Formaldehyde
Haematite mining (underground)
Helicobacter pylori (infection with)
Hepatitis B virus (chronic infection with)
Hepatitis C virus (chronic infection with)
Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) (infection with)
Human papilloma virus (HPV) types 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59
(infection with) (Note: The HPV types that have been classified as carcinogenic to
humans can differ by an order of magnitude in risk for cervical cancer)
Human T-cell lymphotropic virus type I (HTLV-1) (infection with)
Ionizing radiation (all types)
Iron and steel founding (workplace exposure)
Isopropyl alcohol manufacture using strong acids
Kaposi sarcoma herpesvirus (KSHV)/human herpesvirus 8 (HHV-8) (infection with)
Leather dust
Magenta production
Melphalan
Methoxsalen (8-methoxypsoralen) plus ultraviolet A radiation
4,4'-Methylenebis(chloroaniline) (MOCA)
Mineral oils, untreated or mildly treated
MOPP and other combined chemotherapy including alkylating agents
2-Naphthylamine
Neutron radiation
Nickel compounds
N'-Nitrosonornicotine (NNN) and 4-(N-Nitrosomethylamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone
(NNK)

Opisthorchis viverrini (liver fluke; infection with)

Painter (workplace exposure as a)
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
38 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
24






















3,4,5,3',4'-Pentachlorobiphenyl (PCB-126)
2,3,4,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran
Phenacetin (and mixtures containing it)
Phosphorus-32, as phosphate
Plutonium
Radioiodines, including iodine-131
Radionuclides, alpha-particle-emitting, internally deposited (Note: Specific
radionuclides for which there is sufficient evidence for carcinogenicity to humans are
also listed individually as Group 1 agents)
Radionuclides, beta-particle-emitting, internally deposited (Note: Specific radionuclides
for which there is sufficient evidence for carcinogenicity to humans are also listed
individually as Group 1 agents)
Radium-224 and its decay products
Radium-226 and its decay products
Radium-228 and its decay products
Radon-222 and its decay products
Rubber manufacturing industry
Salted fish (Chinese-style)
Schistosoma haematobium (flatworm; infection with)
Semustine (methyl-CCNU)
Shale oils
Silica dust, crystalline, in the form of quartz or cristobalite
Solar radiation
Soot (as found in workplace exposure of chimney sweeps)
Sulfur mustard
Tamoxifen (Note: There is also conclusive evidence that tamoxifen reduces the risk of
contralateral breast cancer in breast cancer patients)

2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-para-dioxin
Thiotepa
Thorium-232 and its decay products
Tobacco, smokeless
Tobacco smoke, secondhand
Tobacco smoking
ortho-Toluidine
Treosulfan
Ultraviolet (UV) radiation, including UVA, UVB, and UVC rays
Ultraviolet-emitting tanning devices
Vinyl chloride

Wood dust

X- and Gamma-radiation










CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
25
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 39
International Agency for Research on Cancer Group 2A: Probably carcinogenic to humans
Probable carcinogens

Acrylamide

Adriamycin (doxorubicin)

Androgenic (anabolic) steroids

Art glass, glass containers, and press ware (manufacture of)

Azacitidine

Biomass fuel (primarily wood), emissions from household combustion

Bischloroethyl nitrosourea (BCNU)

Captafol

Carbon electrode manufacture

Chloramphenicol

alpha-Chlorinated toluenes (benzal chloride, benzotrichloride, benzyl chloride) and
benzoyl chloride (combined exposures)

1-(2-Chloroethyl)-3-cyclohexyl-1-nitrosourea (CCNU)

4-Chloro-ortho-toluidine

Chlorozotocin

Cisplatin

Cobalt metal with tungsten carbide

Creosotes

Cyclopenta[cd]pyrene

Dibenz[a,h]anthracene

Dibenzo[a,l]pyrene

Diethyl sulfate

Dimethylcarbamoyl chloride

1,2-Dimethylhydrazine

Dimethyl sulfate

Epichlorohydrin

Ethyl carbamate (urethane)

Ethylene dibromide

N-Ethyl-N-nitrosourea

Frying, emissions from high-temperature

Glycidol
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
40 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
26

Hairdresser or barber (workplace exposure as)

Human papillomavirus (HPV) type 68 (infection with)

Indium phosphide

IQ (2-Amino-3-methylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoline)

Lead compounds, inorganic

Mate, hot

5-Methoxypsoralen

Methyl methanesulfonate

N-Methyl-N´-nitro-N-nitrosoguanidine (MNNG)

N-Methyl-N-nitrosourea

Nitrate or nitrite (ingested) under conditions that result in endogenous nitrosation

Nitrogen mustard

N-Nitrosodiethylamine

N-Nitrosodimethylamine

2-Nitrotoluene

Non-arsenical insecticides (workplace exposures in spraying

Petroleum refining (workplace exposures in)

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)

Procarbazine hydrochloride

Shiftwork that involves circadian disruption

Styrene-7,8-oxide

Teniposide

Tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene)

Trichloroethylene

1,2,3-Trichloropropane

Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl) phosphate

Vinyl bromide (Note: For practical purposes, vinyl bromide should be considered to act
similarly to the human carcinogen vinyl chloride.)

Vinyl fluoride (Note: For practical purposes, vinyl fluoride should be considered to act
similarly to the human carcinogen vinyl chloride.)
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
27
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 41
In the Workplace
Carcinogens are agents that can cause cancer. Generally, workplace exposures are
considered to be at higher levels than public exposures.
Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS)
In the workplace, the Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System, known as
WHMIS, guarantees workers the right to information about hazardous substances that
they are exposed to, including information indicating whether a substance can cause
cancer. It is a system of integrated provincial and federal laws that requires disclosure
of hazard information to workers through labeling requirements, in material safety data
sheets (MSDS) and through training programs.
Employers must ensure that controlled products used, stored, handled, or disposed of
in the workplace are properly labeled. They must ensure that Material Safety Data
Sheets are made available to workers and that workers receive education and training
to ensure the safe storage, handling and use of controlled products.
NOTE: Material Safety Data Sheets do not list all ingredients in a product, only those
that are considered to be hazardous and make up more than 1 per cent of the
product. Ingredients, that are deemed to be particularly hazardous such as
carcinogens, are listed if they constitute more than 0.1 per cent of the product.
It is important that you request and review the MSDS’s in your workplace as they will
help to inform you about the risks of many chemicals or products you are exposed to,
including carcinogens. Proactive employers, joint health and safety committees and
unions have used the information in Material Safety Data sheets to develop
agreements on the reduction and elimination of carcinogens.
EXAMPLE: The Company in cooperation with workers at Coast Mountain Bus Lines in
the Greater Vancouver Area used material safety data sheets to discover a glue, with
which they were painting the floors of their buses, contained toxic solvents such as
toluene. It was replaced with a safer, higher quality and more economic substitute.
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
42 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
28
In the Environment
The most important federal environmental statute providing access to environmental
data is the Canadian Environmental Protection Act 1999 (CEPA). Under this Act, the
federal government has established the National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI),
a national inventory of specific chemicals released by companies to land, air and
water.
The inventory provides information on the releases and transfers of 268 key
pollutants, including many confirmed and probable carcinogens, by industries across
Canada. It is the only national, legislated and publicly accessible inventory established
in Canada. It requires facilities with more than ten employees to report each year
releases of any of the 268 listed substances, which they use in quantities exceeding
ten tonnes and in concentrations exceeding 1%.
This information is available in an annual public report and through an on-line
database. The NPRI includes information on the company, its location, the number of
employees, and the nature of the activities carried on by the company. As well, it
reveals the quantity of all listed chemicals that are released to water, air or land
injected underground or transferred off site for disposal or recycling.
Companies are also required to report the reasons for changes in yearly releases,
information on anticipated changes and any pollution prevention activities they have
undertaken.
This information is critical for enabling people to identify carcinogens and other
hazardous substances being released in their communities. The NPRI gives them the
concrete data to assess the need for reductions of chemical releases by industries.
Although very few carcinogens have been regulated, regulations have reduced
releases to the environment and in some cases, almost eliminated them from
designated sources. Dioxins and furans for example, have been almost completely
eliminated from the effluent of pulp and paper mills. Another example is the
community of Hudson, Quebec, persuaded their town council to pass a bylaw in 1990
- restricting the use of cosmetic pesticides on public and private property. As a result
of this successful legislation, entire provinces have banned the use of cosmetic
pesticide including Quebec, Ontario, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland/
Labrador.
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
29
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 43
Substitution
Substitution of currently-used materials with less hazardous materials is one of the
most effective ways of eliminating or reducing exposure to materials that are toxic or
pose other hazards.
Other occupational hygiene methods for controlling employee exposure to chemicals
include isolation, enclosure, local exhaust ventilation, process or equipment
modification, good housekeeping, administrative controls and personal protective
equipment. All these methods reduce or eliminate the risk of injury or harm by
interrupting the path of exposure between the hazardous material and the worker.
Substitution removes the hazard at the source.
Extreme care must be taken to ensure that one hazard is not being exchanged for
another, especially one that could even be a more serious hazard. Before deciding to
replace a chemical, you must know the risks of the chemical to employees, the
environment, and the risks for damage to equipment and facilities. If the risks are
serious, then alternatives should be considered and their risks must also be
understood.
The selection of a substitute can be a very complex process. In large organizations
the selection process may involve a committee with representatives from engineering,
purchasing, industrial hygiene, health and safety, maintenance, research and
development, environmental control, waste management, supervisors, union and
workers who directly work with the material. In smaller organizations, one or two
people may carry out many of these functions.
The major considerations to look at when considering the suitability of potential
substitutes are:
1.
Effectiveness - Will the material meet the technical requirements for the job or
process?
2.
Compatibility - The substitute must not interfere or react with the process, the
other materials or the equipment.
3.
Waste Disposal - Will the current waste disposal system meet technical and
regulatory requirements when dealing with any new waste created by using the
substitute?
4.
Hazard Assessment - A hazard assessment should be done to decide whether
to substitute a different chemical or material.
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
44 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
30
Workers’ Compensation
The workers’ compensation system should, in theory, compensate all victims of workrelated disease and thus provide some estimate of the number of occupational
cancers. However, it is widely recognized that only a very small proportion are
compensated.
Cancer is diagnosed many years following exposure, often after a person has retired,
and so the link between cancer and workplace exposures is not often made. In
addition, workers and their physicians may not realize that a work-related cancer,
even though it occurred many years after exposures, and often after a change in the
relevant employment, is still eligible for compensation. Another reason for the
underestimate of the burden of work-related cancers is that workers’ compensation
boards do not insure all workers in their respective regions. This coverage also varies
by jurisdiction. Moreover, the criteria used by compensation boards in the process of
ruling on claims filed for occupational cancer vary by jurisdiction and by combinations
of occupation and carcinogen.
To fill the gaps that exist with respect to understanding what causes cancer and who
is exposed to cancer-causing agents, government and university-based researchers
have used epidemiological studies to link occupational and environmental exposures
with cancer.
We encourage all of our Workers Compensation Representatives and Advocates to
assist in the distribution of our “Chemical Exposure Journal” to begin the process of
recording all chemical exposures in the workplace through the use of the Chemical
Abstract Service (CAS) numbers found on Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS).
More information on Workers Compensation cases can be found at the Association of
Workers’ Compensation Boards of Canada website: www.awcbc.org.
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
31
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 45
P
UNIFO
R
GN
PAI
AM
NT CANCER
VE
C
RE
ADVOCATING
FOR
CHANGE
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 47
YOUR ROLE AS A CANCER PREVENTION ADVOCATE
As Unifor Local Union Representatives Activists and Advocate, we are
requesting that you take part in the following actions to support this
campaign:
1. Identify carcinogens in their workplaces. This is principally
the responsibility of the H&S and Environmental
Representatives and Activists.
2. Insist that they be removed and substituted with less
hazardous substances, (or a minimum that the process be
enclosed). Once again, this is principally the job of the H&S
and Environmental Representatives and Activists.
3. Submit WCB claims for all workers who are found to have
cancer that might be related to work. This is the activity of
the Workers’ Compensation Representatives and
Advocates.
4. Ensure community support by building alliances with
grassroots community organizations that are concerned
about air emissions and hazardous waste from workplace.
This is the activity of the Environmental Activists.
The Unifor Prevent Cancer Campaign
must have the support and encouragement
of the Workplace Committees and
Local Union Leadership.
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
33
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 49
Advocate: a person who upholds or defends a cause / to support or recommend
publicly.
Anyone concerned about cancer control can advocate for it, so long as you have the
will to devote the time and effort to succeed.
Legislation and regulation are key tools for reducing or eliminating exposure to human
carcinogens. Where they have been introduced, they have been effective in reducing
carcinogens in the workplace, eliminating their use in products and limiting their
dispersal into the environment.
If there is willingness to act, even municipalities can use regulations/bylaws/legislation
to control carcinogens.
In order to prepare a convincing and effective advocacy plan it is important to know
the facts about cancer, and what it is exactly that you are trying to advocate and
achieve.
You need to know what your “key message” is going to be when communicating with
politicians, health professionals, as well as the public.
Solidarity with Partners:
It is no secret that in Canada employers and governments place corporate profits and
unfair trade deals ahead of the interests of working people, their families and the
environment, Unifor must be active on the international stage.
To effectively represent our members on Health and Safety issues and to protect our
environment which has far reaching health issues to all we must be actively approach
and engage other organizations outside of the labour movement.
In the following pages you will see an example of building these partnerships with
Unifor, Canadian Cancer Society and the Occupational Health Clinics for Ontario
Workers. As Unifor Activists we encourage you to reach out and build solidarity with
those grassroots organizations in your community that share our common concerns
and goals.
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
50 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
34
The following are four issues we will lobby for government action on:
 Petition to Provincial Medical Associations calling for an occupational history
recording process and the establishment of an occupational cancer registry.
 Petition to the Provincial government for the establishment of Occupational
Health Clinics, modeled after the Ontario Clinics.
 Petition to Provincial governments to enact legislation for Toxics Use Reduction
and the establishment of a Toxics Use Reduction Institute modeled after the
Massachusetts program.
 Petition to the Federal government calling for legislation requiring Inclusive
labeling that will indicate if cancer-causing substances are present in products,
they would be identified by a clear, recognizable symbol, clearly visible to the
consumer.
Petitions
Petitions serve many purposes.

They raise awareness and education on the issue.

They provide a profile for the media to report on.

They provide a political opportunity to challenge the ruling government.
A petition must contain a minimum of 25 valid signatures with addresses.
A petition should contain signatures of residents of Canada only. Persons not resident in
Canada cannot petition the House of Commons of Canada.
There is no minimum age requirement for anyone signing a petition.
Each petitioner must sign his or her own name directly on the petition and must not sign for
anyone else.
A petition must contain original signatures written directly on the document and not pasted,
taped, photocopied or otherwise transferred to it.
Some signatures and addresses must appear on the first sheet with the text of the petition.
Signatures and addresses may appear on the reverse of the petition.
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
35
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 51
P
UNIFO
R
GN
PAI
AM
NT CANCER
VE
C
RE
OCCUPATIONAL
HISTORY
PETITION
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 53
Petition
To the Legislative Assembly:
WHEREAS a disproportionate number of workers are diagnosed;
WHEREAS there is no official procedure to identify how many of these cancer incidences are caused by workplace
exposure to cancer-causing substances (carcinogens);
WHEREAS most cancers can be beaten if government had the political will to make industry replace toxic substances
with non-toxic substances in work;
WHEREAS very few health organizations study the link between occupations and cancer, even though this link is an
important step to defeating this dreadful disease;
WE, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly as follows:
THAT IT BECOME A LEGAL REQUIREMENT THAT OCCUPATIONAL HISTORY BE RECORDED ON A
STANDARD FORM WHEN A PATIENT PRESENTS AT A PHYSICIAN FOR DIAGNOSIS OR TREATMENT
OF CANCER AND THAT THE DIAGNOSIS AND OCCUPATIONAL HISTORY BE FORWARDED TO A
CENTRAL CANCER REGISTRY FOR ANALYSIS AS TO THE LINK BETWEEN CANCER AND
OCCUPATION.
NAME (printed)
ADDRESS (printed)
Postal Code
Signature
1._____________________________________________________________________________
2._____________________________________________________________________________
3._____________________________________________________________________________
4._____________________________________________________________________________
5._____________________________________________________________________________
6._____________________________________________________________________________
7._____________________________________________________________________________
8._____________________________________________________________________________
9._____________________________________________________________________________
10.____________________________________________________________________________
11.____________________________________________________________________________
12.____________________________________________________________________________
13.____________________________________________________________________________
14.____________________________________________________________________________
15.____________________________________________________________________________
16.____________________________________________________________________________
17.____________________________________________________________________________
18.____________________________________________________________________________
19.____________________________________________________________________________
20.____________________________________________________________________________
21.____________________________________________________________________________
22.____________________________________________________________________________
23.____________________________________________________________________________
24.____________________________________________________________________________
25.____________________________________________________________________________
INSTRUCTIONS: Only valid with the original signatures of eligible voters.
Please print clearly
Return original petition to: Unifor Health and Safety Department, 205 Placer Court, Toronto, ON M2H 3H9
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 55
P
UNIFO
R
GN
PAI
AM
NT CANCER
VE
C
RE
OCCUPATIONAL
HEALTH
CLINICS
PETITION
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 57
Petition
To the Legislative Assembly:
Whereas it is vital that occupational health and safety services provided to workers be conducted by organizations in
which workers have faith; and
Whereas the Occupational Health Clinics for Ontario Workers (OHCOW) have provided such services on behalf of
workers for many years; and
Whereas workers have few resources to draw on to investigate the causal relationship between workplace exposures and
illness; and
Whereas the clinics have made a significant contribution to improvements in workplace health and safety and the
reduction of injuries, illnesses and death caused by work; and
Whereas the OHCOW model has provided well researched medical diagnoses to assist workers seeking workers
compensation for related illness and disease;
WE, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly as follows:
THAT the province of __________________, adopt and enact the funding and operating model as has been
established with the Occupational Health Clinics for Ontario Workers.
NAME (printed)
ADDRESS (printed)
Postal Code
Signature
1._____________________________________________________________________________
2._____________________________________________________________________________
3._____________________________________________________________________________
4._____________________________________________________________________________
5._____________________________________________________________________________
6._____________________________________________________________________________
7._____________________________________________________________________________
8._____________________________________________________________________________
9._____________________________________________________________________________
10.____________________________________________________________________________
11.____________________________________________________________________________
12.____________________________________________________________________________
13.____________________________________________________________________________
14.____________________________________________________________________________
15.____________________________________________________________________________
16.____________________________________________________________________________
17.____________________________________________________________________________
18.____________________________________________________________________________
19.____________________________________________________________________________
20.____________________________________________________________________________
21.____________________________________________________________________________
22.____________________________________________________________________________
23.____________________________________________________________________________
24.____________________________________________________________________________
25.____________________________________________________________________________
INSTRUCTIONS: Only valid with the original signatures of eligible voters.
Please print clearly
Return original petition to: Unifor Health and Safety Department, 205 Placer Court, Toronto, ON M2H 3H9
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 59
P
UNIFO
R
GN
PAI
AM
NT CANCER
VE
C
RE
TOXIC USE
REDUCTION
PETITION
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 61
Petition
WHEREAS, persistent, toxic chemicals, are released into the environment every day from industrial activities; and
WHEREAS many of these chemicals are toxic even in small amounts, remain in the environment for long periods of
time, and build up in humans, fish and animals; and
WHEREAS, persistent, toxic chemicals have been linked to birth defects, reproductive failure, cancer, learning and
behavioral problems in young children, and other health problems; and
WHEREAS, these chemicals continue to accumulate in our body’s through our lifetime at the detriment of our health
and well –being; and
WHEREAS, eliminating or reducing the manufacture or use of toxic chemicals is an essential step in
reducing the contamination of our workplaces and environment, and
WHEREAS, the Toxics Use Reduction Act as enacted in the state of Massachusetts, USA and which is supported by the
Toxics Use Reduction Institute has been the most successful model in North America for providing safer alternatives in
the use of toxic chemicals;
WE, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly as follows:
THAT the province of __________________, adopt and enact the funding and operating model as has been
established in the State of Massachusetts to encourage markets for clean technologies and safe alternatives to
extremely hazardous substances or toxic chemicals through a common-sense approach to pollution reduction.
NAME (printed)
ADDRESS (printed)
Postal Code
Signature
1._____________________________________________________________________________
2._____________________________________________________________________________
3._____________________________________________________________________________
4._____________________________________________________________________________
5._____________________________________________________________________________
6._____________________________________________________________________________
7._____________________________________________________________________________
8._____________________________________________________________________________
9._____________________________________________________________________________
10.____________________________________________________________________________
11.____________________________________________________________________________
12.____________________________________________________________________________
13.____________________________________________________________________________
14.____________________________________________________________________________
15.____________________________________________________________________________
16.____________________________________________________________________________
17.____________________________________________________________________________
18.____________________________________________________________________________
19.____________________________________________________________________________
20.____________________________________________________________________________
21.____________________________________________________________________________
22.____________________________________________________________________________
23.____________________________________________________________________________
24.____________________________________________________________________________
25.____________________________________________________________________________
INSTRUCTIONS: Only valid with the original signatures of eligible voters.
Please print clearly
Return original petition to: Unifor Health and Safety Department, 205 Placer Court, Toronto, ON M2H 3H9
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 63
P
UNIFO
R
GN
PAI
AM
NT CANCER
VE
C
RE
INCLUSIVE
LABELING
PETITION
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 65
Petition
To the Legislative Assembly:
WHEREAS, Canada’s current system of labeling hazardous materials in common household products does not include
confirmed or suspected carcinogens that are toxic to human health and damaging to the environment;
WHEREAS, consumers often do not realize what types of harmful materials or the level of danger they are exposed to
when purchasing and using various products, such as food, household cleaners, and cosmetics;
WHEREAS, a more comprehensive labeling system warning of potential harm would help to preserve safety, empower
consumers, and encourage the market to sincerely consider the dangers of the chemicals and substances put into the
products;
WHEREAS, Canadians would also be in a better position to put pressure on the industry and the federal government to
make it illegal for companies to use toxins and carcinogens in their products without proper labeling in a similar manner
as the legislation already passed in the European Union and the State of California;
THEREFORE, your petitioners call on the Government of Canada to support Right to Know Bill Labeling.
NAME (printed)
ADDRESS (printed)
Postal Code
Signature
1._____________________________________________________________________________
2._____________________________________________________________________________
3._____________________________________________________________________________
4._____________________________________________________________________________
5._____________________________________________________________________________
6._____________________________________________________________________________
7._____________________________________________________________________________
8._____________________________________________________________________________
9._____________________________________________________________________________
10.____________________________________________________________________________
11.____________________________________________________________________________
12.____________________________________________________________________________
13.____________________________________________________________________________
14.____________________________________________________________________________
15.____________________________________________________________________________
16.____________________________________________________________________________
17.____________________________________________________________________________
18.____________________________________________________________________________
19.____________________________________________________________________________
20.____________________________________________________________________________
21.____________________________________________________________________________
22.____________________________________________________________________________
23.____________________________________________________________________________
24.____________________________________________________________________________
25.____________________________________________________________________________
INSTRUCTIONS: Only valid with the original signatures of eligible voters.
Please print clearly
Return original petition to: Unifor Health and Safety Department, 205 Placer Court, Toronto, ON M2H 3H9
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 67
P
UNIFO
R
GN
PAI
AM
NT CANCER
VE
C
RE
PARTNERSHIPS
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 69
WORKING IN PARTNERSHIP
CANADIAN CANCER SOCIETY
OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CLINICS FOR ONTARIO WORKERS
UNIFOR
In a collaborative effort to advocate for cancer prevention initiatives and to
provide support to those living with cancer today, Unifor is joining forces
with the Canadian Cancer Society (CCS) and the Occupational Health Clinics for
Ontario Workers (OHCOW). Through this alliance it is our intention to bring a
new and aggressive focus to occupational and environmentally related cancers
and assist with the compassionate care, cancer patients need and deserve.
Watch for more information as this unique partnership develops.
Our Objective:
To strengthen our working relationship to help prevent cancer, to advocate for
better treatments to fight cancer and to support all Canadians living with
cancer.
Why:
Cancer is the leading cause of premature death in Canada. The number of new
cancer cases and deaths continues to increase because our population is
growing and aging.
There is hope. Today, 62% of people diagnosed with cancer will survive
compared with 25% in 1940 when the Society began funding research.
Research also shows that many cancers – whether from occupational,
environmental or lifestyle causes – are preventable, treatable and survivable.
We’ve made great progress, however, there is still much work to be done.
Given the membership and mandates of these 3 organizations, a proactive,
collaboration has the potential to make a significant impact in the fight against
cancer and support for those facing cancer.
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
45
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 71
CCS - The Canadian Cancer Society is the largest, national, non-governmental
(donor) funder of cancer research in Canada. The Society is making more impact,
against more cancers, in more communities across Canada than any other cancer
charity through research and support services.
OHCOW - The Occupational Health Clinics for Ontario Workers (OHCOW) is a
network of occupational health clinics funded by the Ontario Workplace Safety and
Insurance Board. OHCOW has a long history of investigating and documenting
occupational cancer for individual workers and large groups and clusters, especially
related to asbestos exposure.
UNIFOR - Unifor is the largest private-sector union in Canada, formed by the coming
together of the Canadian Auto Workers Union (CAW) and the Communications,
Energy and Paper Workers Union (CEP). Unifor represents more than 300,000
members in every province and territory in Canada.
Unifor is not only dedicated to fighting for workers rights at the bargaining table, it's
equally committed to taking on economic, political and social issues that affect its
members and their families in the broader community.
www.cancer.ca
www.ohcow.on.ca
www.unifor.org
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
72 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
46
The Canadian Cancer Society
The Canadian Cancer Society is a national organization of volunteers whose mission
is the eradication of cancer and the enhancement of the quality of life for people living
with it. The national office of the Canadian Cancer Society works collaboratively with
staff in regional offices across the country to develop health and public policy
statements. They have been involved in trying to reduce the cancer risk for Canadians
for many years, primarily through educating the public about tobacco use and
environmental tobacco smoke, and the hazards of sun-induced skin cancer.
In the last few years, however, the Canadian Cancer Society has become more
engaged in the primary prevention of cancers related to environmental and
occupational exposures.
They have publicly supported the use of the precautionary principle, and because of
this policy, they have been active in the campaign to ban the cosmetic use of
pesticides on lawns and gardens. They identified known, probable or possible
carcinogens used in formulating pesticides. Because these substances posed a threat
of harm and had no countervailing health benefit, the Society argued that they should
be banned.
As part of their mission to eradicate cancer, the Canadian Cancer Society has an
extensive and highly visible public education campaign, including community based
presentations, displays, Internet sites for the national office and provincial offices, and
print publications.
As well as their policies on the cosmetic use of pesticides and pressure treated
lumber, there is a policy statement on occupational exposures and health messages
on environmental contaminants such as, electromagnetic fields, chlorinated water, air
pollution and radiation. These messages provide helpful information to the public on
how to minimize or avoid exposures that might cause cancer.
Moreover, the Canadian Cancer Society is developing a new cancer prevention
strategy that will give more emphasis to prevention. They are shifting their focus from
individual behaviour to advocacy, community mobilization and public education. The
B.C. and Yukon Division of the CCS are already doing consultations in local
communities and encouraging them to develop strategies to prevent environmental
and occupational-related cancers.
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
47
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 73
Workers’ Health and Safety Clinics
Across Canada, there are only a few provinces that support workers’ health and safety
clinics – Alberta, Manitoba and Ontario. They provide medical services to Workers
who have been injured or developed illnesses, including cancer.
The clinics were established as workers became increasingly aware of injuries and
illnesses caused by their working conditions that were not well understood by the
conventional medical system. The workers’ health and safety clinics are specially
funded clinics set up by labour organizations, government ministries and supported in
some cases by universities.
The clinics offer inquiry services, medical diagnoses by doctors trained in
occupational medicine, outreach and education and services for H&S committees,
union members and/or non-union of workers.
In addition to helping workers determine whether their cancer has been caused by
their exposure at work, they play an active role in visiting workplaces and intervening
to prevent more exposures.
In Ontario, there are 5 clinics funded by the Ontario government in major industrial
cities. These clinics have been particularly active in cancer prevention.
As part of their diagnostic services, the medical staff considers a patient’s work history
and their exposures to carcinogens. They will investigate whether the cancer or other
illness is occupationally related and, if it is, they will recommend ways to prevent
further problems. With the patient’s consent, the information may be shared with the
joint health and safety committee at their workplace. This allows the committee to
understand the possible risks in the workplace and to make changes that would
prevent other cancers. They also help workers file compensation for work related
illnesses.
One of their most effective strategies for primary cancer prevention is the service
offered to health and safety committees. Occupational hygienists visit workplaces
usually at the invitation of the joint health and safety committee and with the
agreement of the company. They can do assessments to identify carcinogens or other
toxic substances being used and recommend a less hazardous substitute.
*Alberta Occupational Injury Service, Manitoba MLF Occupational Health Centre, Occupational Health Clinics
for Ontario Workers
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
74 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
48
UNIFOR
Unifor is the largest private sector union in the country with approximately 310,000
members from coast to coast to coast.
Since Unifor’s founding convention in 2013 we continue to strive to be the best, diverse
and progressive organization representing workers throughout virtually every sector of
the Canadian economy.
Unifor members work in aerospace, mining, fishing, auto and specialty vehicle
assembly, auto parts, hotels, airlines, rail, education, hospitality, retail, road
transportation, health care, manufacturing, shipbuilding, energy, communications,
forest and paper industries and other sectors of the economy
The Unifor Health, Safety & Environment department fights for better laws and
information on substances found in the workplace.
This office also helps local unions set up programs to eliminate hazardous conditions in
the workplace and assists local union discussion leaders and national representatives
to conduct health and safety training programs.
Our commitment is to support and strengthen our members with a common perspective
on H&S, Environment and Compensation issues as they relate to the workplace, our
co-workers and the surrounding community. Trade union activists must have the tools
and capability to address the everyday concerns of the workplace environment, while
keeping a labour perspective in mind.
A healthy union ultimately depends on a knowledgeable and mobilized membership.
In Unifor, the emergence of that kind of membership base has always rested on the
development of a strong workplace leadership –– one that provides concrete services,
passes along a union culture, develops worker confidence, puts worker concerns into a
wider context, and generally leads the fight for workers’ rights.
Our union is committed to addressing the needs and concerns of our members.
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 75
P
UNIFO
R
GN
PAI
AM
NT CANCER
VE
C
RE
GLOSSARY
OF
TERMS
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 77
Acute Exposure - a short-term exposure usually occurring at high concentration.
Acute Health Effect - an effect that develops either immediately or a short time after exposure.
Benign - Of no danger to health; not recurrent or progressive; not malignant.
Biohazardous Infectious Material - a material that contains organisms and the toxins produced by
these organisms that have been shown to cause disease or are believed to cause disease in either
humans or animals.
Carcinogens - agents/compounds that may induce cancer in humans.
Carcinoma - An invasive malignant tumor.
CAS Registry Number - a number assigned to a material by the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS)
to provide a single unique identifier.
Chronic Exposure - a long-term exposure, usually occurring at low concentration.
Chronic Health Effects - an effect that appears a long time after exposure.
Controlled Products - Under the Controlled Products Regulation, a controlled product is defined as
a material, product or substance which is imported or sold in Canada and meets the criteria for one
or more of the following classes:
·
Class A - Compressed Gas
·
Class B - Flammable and Combustible Material
·
Class C - Oxidizing Material
·
Class D - Poisonous and Infectious Material
·
Class E - Corrosive Material
·
Class F - Dangerously Reactive Material
Dose - amount of the agent that has entered the body.
Exposure Limits- established concentrations which, if not exceeded, will not generally cause
adverse effects to the worker exposed. Exposure limits differ in name and meaning depending on
origin. For example:
1. The exposure levels for the hazardous chemicals that are included in the Regulation
respecting the Control of Exposure to Biological or Chemical Agents - made under the
Occupational Health and Safety Act of Ontario, are expressed as follow:
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
51
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 79
TWAEV Time-Weighted Average Exposure Value: The average airborne concentration of a
biological or chemical agent to which a worker may be exposed in a work day or a work week.
STEV Short Term Exposure Value: - The maximum airborne concentration of a chemical or
biological agent to which a worker may be exposed in any 15 minute period, provided the
TWAEV is not exceeded.
CEV Ceiling Exposure Value: The maximum airborne concentration of a biological or
chemical agent to which a worker may be exposed at any time.
SKIN: This notation indicates that direct or airborne contact with the product may result in
significant absorption of the product through the skin, mucous membranes or eyes. Inclusion
of this notation is intended to suggest that preventative action be taken against absorption of
the agent through these routes of entry.
2. Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) are exposure guidelines developed by the American
Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). They have been adopted by
several Canadian governments and others as their legal limits. They are expressed as
follows:TLV-TWA Threshold Limit Value - Time-Weighted Average: The time-weighted average
concentration for a normal 8 hour work day and a 40 hour work week, to which nearly all
workers may be repeatedly exposed, day after day, without adverse effect.
TLV-STEL Threshold Limit Value - Short Term Exposure Limit: a 15 minute time-weighted
average exposure which should not be exceeded at any time during a work day even if the 8
hr TWA is within the TLV. Exposures at the STEL should not be repeated more than 4 times a
day and there should be at least 60 minutes between successive exposures at the STEL.
TLV-C Threshold Limit Value - Ceiling: the concentration that should not be exceeded during
any part of the working exposure.
Other exposure limits include the Permissible Exposure Limits (PEL) which are legal
exposure limits in the United States.
Hazard- the potential for harmful effects.
Hazardous Ingredient - Under the Hazardous Products Act, a chemical must be listed in the
Hazardous Ingredients section of a MSDS if:
·
it meets the criteria for a controlled product;
·
it is on the Ingredient Disclosure List;
·
there is no toxicological information available; or
·
the supplier has reason to believe it might be hazardous.
Ingestion - means taking a material into the body by mouth (swallowing).
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
80 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
52
Inhalation - means taking a material into the body by breathing it in.
Irritant - some sort of aggravation of whatever tissue the material comes in contact with.
LC50 - the concentration of a material in air which causes death in 50% of a group of test animals.
The material is inhaled over a set period of time, usually 4 hrs. LC stands for lethal concentration.
LD50 - the weight of material which causes the death in 50% of a group of test animals. It is usually
expressed in weight of material per weight of test animal. LD stands for lethal dose.
Malignant - uncontrollable or resistant to therapy; rapidly spreading.
Material Causing Immediate and Serious Toxic Effects - classified under "Poisonous and
Infectious Material" as toxic or very toxic based on information such as the LD50 or LC50.
Material Causing Other Toxic Effects - classified under "Poisonous and Infectious Material" as a
material causing toxic effects such as skin or respiratory sensitization, carcinogenicity, mutagenicity,
etc.
Metastasize – to spread to a new site in the body via blood or lymph vessels.
Mutagen - an agent that affects the genes or cells of the exposed people in such a way that it may
cause cancer or undesirable mutation in some later generation.
Parts Per Million (ppm) - represents the concentration of gases or vapour in air. For example, 1
ppm of a gas means that 1 unit of the gas is present for every 1 million units of air.
Sensitization - the development, over time, of an allergic reaction to a chemical.
Solvent - a material which is capable of dissolving another chemical.
Teratogen - agents or compounds that a pregnant woman takes into her body that generate defects
in the fetus.
Toxicity - ability of a substance to cause harmful effects.
Trade Name - the name under which a product is commercially known.
Tumour - a mass of tissue formed by a new growth of cells.
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
53
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 81
P
UNIFO
R
GN
PAI
AM
NT CANCER
VE
C
RE
RECOMMENDED
WEBSITES
&
READING
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 83
WEBSITES
Health,Safety
Safety&&Environment:
Environment
 Unifor
CAW Health,
www.unifor.org
www.caw.ca
 Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety: www.ccohs.ca
 Canadian Cancer Society:
www.cancer.ca
 Canadian Environmental Protection Act:
www.ec.gc.ca
 Canadian Labour Congress:
www.canadianlabour.ca
 CAREX Canada:
www.carexcanada.ca
 International Agency for Research on Cancer:
www.iarc.fr
 National Pollution Release Inventory:
www.ec.gc.ca/inrp-npri
 Occupational Cancer Research Centre
www.occupationalcancer.ca
 Occupational Health Clinics for Ontario Workers:
www.ohcow.on.ca
 Toxics Reduction Act – Ontario:
www.ene.gov.on.ca
 World Health Organization:
www.who.int
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
55
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 85
BOOKS
 Slow Death By Rubber Duck – Rick Smith, Bruce Lourie
 The Secret History of the War on Cancer – Devra Davis
 When Smoke Ran Like Water – Devra Davis
 Cancer: 101 Solutions to a Preventable Epidemic – Liz Armstrong
 The Politics of Cancer – Dr. Samuel Epstein
 Living Downstream – Sandra Steingraber
 Toxic Deception – Fagin, Lavelle
 Silent Spring – Rachel Carson
CAW PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2012
86 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
56
UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014 / 87
Produced by:
Unifor Health and Safety Department
205 Placer Court
Toronto, Ontario
M2H 3H9
Tel:
416. 495. 6558
Fax:
416. 495. 6552
E-mail: [email protected]
Web:www.unifor.org
92 / UNIFOR PREVENT CANCER CAMPAIGN 2014
HS-E-3074/2014