Jonathan Soble’s article in the New York Times details the Japanese government first officially acknowledging radiation exposure following a tsunami strike against the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant as a cause of cancer. It provided worker’s compensation to one of the clean-up workers assigned to the plant. It appears other compensations are on the horizon.
A significant portion of the 40,000 clean-up workers assigned to the power plant following the crisis seek compensation for cancer treatment from two main sources: public insurance programs and the plant’s owner, Tepco. The grounds for worker’s compensation are unstable and murky. The situation is further complicated by 80,000 displaced former residents from the vicinity of the plant. Although the best course of action is unclear, I argue the government’s response is heading in the right direction, bringing in the public’s trust; whereas, Tepco continues to shirk responsibility, leaving them in an unfavorable position. …show more content…
First, before the plant even experienced the natural disaster, Tepco trained their workers sloppily. Many criticize Tepco’s poor protective measures. Similarly, upon plant failure, Tepco hired unskilled clean-up labor, and did so through subcontractors, leaving people at a significantly higher risk of radiation harm. A government examination of the facility’s safety practice showed Tepco significantly underreporting radiation exposure to a third of the company’s workers. The company’s lack of transparency puts them in poor favor of the government and the
A significant portion of the 40,000 clean-up workers assigned to the power plant following the crisis seek compensation for cancer treatment from two main sources: public insurance programs and the plant’s owner, Tepco. The grounds for worker’s compensation are unstable and murky. The situation is further complicated by 80,000 displaced former residents from the vicinity of the plant. Although the best course of action is unclear, I argue the government’s response is heading in the right direction, bringing in the public’s trust; whereas, Tepco continues to shirk responsibility, leaving them in an unfavorable position. …show more content…
First, before the plant even experienced the natural disaster, Tepco trained their workers sloppily. Many criticize Tepco’s poor protective measures. Similarly, upon plant failure, Tepco hired unskilled clean-up labor, and did so through subcontractors, leaving people at a significantly higher risk of radiation harm. A government examination of the facility’s safety practice showed Tepco significantly underreporting radiation exposure to a third of the company’s workers. The company’s lack of transparency puts them in poor favor of the government and the