Siemens Faces Class Action Lawsuit Welders’ Toxic Fume Exposure Risks

Lawsuit alleges workers at a Siemens Mobility factory in California were exposed to cancer-causing hexavalent chromium fumes.

Two welders claim that they were exposed to toxic fumes during the process of their regular work at a Siemens Mobility factory in California, according to allegations raised in a recently filed class action lawsuit.

The complaint (PDF) was brought by Shelby Scovill and Kody Maynard in the Superior Court for the State of California on February 25, indicating that Siemens did not provide adequate protective gear and deliberately concealed the level of exposure to hexavalent chromium fumes for workers at their Sacramento, California factory.

Siemens Mobility is a division of the multinational corporation, Siemens, focused on rail and public transportation technology.

Hexavalent chromium (CR(VI)), a known human carcinogen, is released as particulate matter fumes when welding stainless steel or other chromium-containing metals, posing risks of respiratory and kidney damage, cardiovascular issues, reproductive harm, neurological impairment and cancer.

According to the Seimans class action lawsuit, Scovill and Maynard both claim that they worked as welders at the company’s Sacramento, California factory, and that over the course of their employment they were never informed of the high levels of toxic fumes they were exposed to as a direct result of their work.

However, the lawsuit indicates that many workers at the factory have suffered from symptoms consistent with high exposure to hexavalent chromium, including metallic tastes and chemical odors while working, as well as headaches, nosebleeds, lethargy, difficulty concentrating and respiratory irritation.

In their complaint, Scovill and Maynard argue that the protective gear provided by their employer was insufficient to shield them from the hazardous fumes they were exposed to on the job.

Due to the company’s misrepresentations of factory conditions, the workers continued to be exposed to the toxic hexavalent chromium fumes both through their skin and via inhalation, increasing their risk of long term exposure side effects, the complaint states.

“Defendants failed to conduct proper exposure monitoring, leading Plaintiffs and the Class to unknowingly work in dangerously high concentrations of Cr(VI). Industry standards require that full-shift personal exposure monitoring be conducted for workers exposed to Cr(VI),” the lawsuit states. “Instead, Defendants provided monitors to personnel who briefly entered the welding areas, resulting in data that significantly underestimated actual exposure levels for full-time welders like Plaintiffs and the Class.”

Scovill and Maynard bring forth allegations of negligence against Siemens Mobility, seeking compensatory damages, as well as past and future medical and incidental expenses for monitoring, loss of wages and loss of earning capacity on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated.

Hexavalent chromium has been at the center of previous chemical exposure lawsuits, including a toxic tort case against a tannery company after a cluster of brain tumors emerged in a Missouri county. The lawsuit alleged that the facility distributed toxic sludge contaminated with hexavalent chromium to local farmers for use as fertilizer, exposing the community to hazardous chemicals.