EPA Scientists Said They Were Pressured to Downplay Harms From Chemicals. A Watchdog Found They Were Retaliated Against.

Thu, 10 Oct 2024 11:47:37 +1100

Andrew Pam <xanni [at] glasswings.com.au>

Andrew Pam
<https://www.propublica.org/article/epa-scientists-faced-retaliation-after-finding-harm-from-chemicals>

"Three reports issued by the agency’s inspector general detailed personal
attacks suffered by the scientists — including being called “stupid,”
“piranhas” and “pot-stirrers” — and called on the EPA to take “appropriate
corrective action” in response.

More than three years ago, a small group of government scientists came forward
with disturbing allegations.

During President Donald Trump’s administration, they said, their managers at
the Environmental Protection Agency began pressuring them to make new chemicals
they were vetting seem safer than they really were. They were encouraged to
delete evidence of chemicals’ harms, including cancer, miscarriage and
neurological problems, from their reports — and in some cases, they said, their
managers deleted the information themselves.

After the scientists pushed back, they received negative performance reviews
and three of them were removed from their positions in the EPA’s division of
new chemicals and reassigned to jobs elsewhere in the agency.

On Wednesday, the EPA inspector general announced that it had found that some
of the treatment experienced by three of those scientists — Martin Phillips,
Sarah Gallagher and William Irwin — amounted to retaliation.

Three reports issued by the inspector general confirmed that the scientists’
negative performance reviews as well as a reassignment and the denial of an
award that can be used for cash or time off were retaliatory. They also
detailed personal attacks by supervisors, who called them “stupid,” “piranhas”
and “pot-stirrers.”

The reports called on the EPA to take “appropriate corrective action” in
response to the findings. In one case, the inspector general noted that
supervisors who violate the Whistleblower Protection Act should be suspended
for at least three days.

The reports focus only on the retaliation claims. The inspector general is
expected to issue reports in the future about the whistleblowers’ scientific
allegations."

Via Susan ****

Cheers,
       *** Xanni ***
--
mailto:xanni@xanadu.net               Andrew Pam
http://xanadu.com.au/                 Chief Scientist, Xanadu
https://glasswings.com.au/            Partner, Glass Wings
https://sericyb.com.au/               Manager, Serious Cybernetics

Comment via email

Home E-Mail Sponsors Index Search About Us