The verdict is a major blow to around 240 other workers and families of former workers, most of whom were employed in IBM's semiconductor and disk drive manufacturing processes, who have also filed lawsuits against the company.
Former IBM workers Alida Hernandez, who suffered breast cancer, and James Moore, suffering from non-Hodgkins lymphoma, took IBM to trial in November in an action designed to bypass California's state workers' compensation legislation. Normally workers are unable to sue their employers for damages but gain compensation through a different procedure under the state law.
Because Hernandez and Moore were seeking damages not just to compensate the harm they suffered, but also to punish IBM – known as punitive damages – the crucial issue in the case was what IBM actually knew. To win punitive damages, Californian law required the plaintiffs to prove that IBM knew that the chemicals were affecting its employees and that IBM hid that knowledge.
Pre-trial hearings dealt an early blow to this argument. An IBM database of employee death records was ruled inadmissible, after IBM lawyers argued that it was solely for the purpose of dealing with death benefits.
The jury, given a seven-question verdict form, in the end needed to answer only one question – concluding, according to Law.com, that the workers had not been chemically poisoned while at work.
IBM has always denied the claims, maintaining that it had done everything it could to provide a safe environment for its workers. It has also argued that the workers' diseases are amongst the most common forms of cancer and were not linked to the time they spent working for IBM.
But IBM is not out of the woods yet: another case is due to start in New York next week, alleging that the birth defects suffered by the daughter of former IBM worker Heather Curtis, were caused by the chemicals that Curtis came into contact with at work. Curtis is claiming $100 million in damages.