Sensient Flavors’ base in Indianapolis (Credit: Indy Star)
Sensient Flavors’ base in Indiana remains under investigation after workers reported health problems and experienced work-related injuries.
Indy Star reported on the issues at Sensient Flavors’ factory plant in Indianapolis, Indiana, which continue a year after it settled one of the state’s “largest workplace safety cases” and installed $4 million (€2.9 million) worth of engineering upgrades “needed to protect workers from potentially deadly chemicals used in butter flavourings”.
Findings from a health study last year had seen nearly a third of 100 production staff experience abnormally restrictive lung function, and despite the “big win” after the study, “problems persist” at the plant, which the news outlet stated “add fuel to ongoing concerns” about the state body that enforces health and safety – the Indiana Occupational Safety and Health Administration (IOSHA).
A worker was electrocuted and treated in hospital during the negotiations for the settlement last year, but the state “did not open a new case”, which experts have said “deprived the state of an opportunity to correct or prevent” other issues. A year later another employee was electrocuted, and the Indy Star added that the IOSHA is now under investigation amid concerns about its “slim staffing, relatively few inspections and slow complaint-response time”.
Sensient had been fined $367,500 (€270,957) in penalties for exposing staff to diacetyl, which can create a condition called “popcorn lung”, and it also paid $99,000 (€72,992) as well as agreeing to “reduce employee exposure”, but the electronic issues are now causing many to doubt the effectiveness of the IOSHA to investigate the new worker injuries, with a senior director paying an “informal visit” as opposed to sending an inspector to do a full investigation.
Robert Dittmer, a spokesman for the IOSHA, stated that “Sensient has made significant progress and is cooperating fully in completing their abatement requirements”, and noted that the IOSHA had made “significant progress” in its own attempts to alleviate concerns, though Sensient “did not respond to multiple requests for comment”.
Safety inspector Bill Pfister, a former IOSHA inspector, noted that an inspection “may have turned up other electrical hazards”, whilst a citation “may have motivated Sensient to avoid a repeat violation because they carry substantially higher penalties. It’s definitely strange. It’s something an inspector probably should have looked at”.