UKRAINE: Chernobyl Workers Strike as Money Runs Short

By IPS Correspondents Reprint | | Print |

Judith Perera and Andrei Ivanov

MOSCOW, Jul 17 1996 (IPS) - Construction workers at Chernobyl’s nuclear power plant, their pockets empty and patience exhausted, have gone on strike, according to reports here.

Many of them have not been paid in months. Stress levels are running high as employees, having heard about the imminent closure of Reactor No. 1 in November and of the plant itself in year 2000, worry about losing their jobs.

Last week, a majority of construction workers — hired to build secondary facilities at Chernobyl, such as storage sheds and temporary living quarters for shift workers — decided to go on strike. Of the group of more than 130 people, 30 have also embarked on a hunger strike.

The construction workers often work in contaminated areas. They have not been paid for their dangerous labour since February. The construction department owes its employees the equivalent of some 200,000 US dollars.

Plant official Leonid Kostyuk blames the wage backlog on the failure of industrial customers to pay for electricity, and lack of government funding. “How can these workers be paid if the Chernobyl station has received nothing from the state budget?” he asked.

This is part of a wider problem affecting the entire nuclear industry in Ukraine. Consumer debts for electricity supplied by Ukraine’s nuclear power stations stood at almost a billion dollars at the beginning of July. On Jun. 25, workers at nuclear power stations were owed a total of 14 million dollars in unpaid wages. And the State Committee for the Use of Nuclear Power (Goskomatom) says the problem is growing.

At Chernobyl the general insecurity felt by plant workers is being reflected in lax safety standards. A series of accidents have occurred over the past few months.

At the end of June an increase in background radiation was detected at Unit 1 during a routine inspection. A contaminated area of around 10 sq.m. was identified in the reactor hall, reportedly as a result of fuel being dropped during a refuelling operation. No personnel were affected but an investigating commission was set up.

According to engineer Galina Nosach the contamination occurred in a corridor in the main room Unit No. 1. She said it posed no threat to staff or the environment.

However, Tetyana Yagish, a spokeswoman for Goskomatom, said the leak resulted in radiation levels five times higher than normal in a corridor regularly used by staff. The leak was detected as staff used television monitors to monitor the reactor core. The incident was the second in two weeks.

The previous week a fire broke out at a storage shed near Reactor No. 3. but was quickly extinguished.

Serious contamination also occurred at Unit 1 in November 1995 leading to the formal reprimand of Plant Director Sergei Parashin. Originally ranked at Level 1 on the International Nuclear Events Scale (INES), the accident was later reassessed at Level 3. The INES ranges from 1 to 7 with a higher level indicating a more serious event. The 1986 Chernobyl disaster was ranked at Level 7.

The November incident led to a review of safety procedures at the station.

The 10th anniversary of the Chernobyl accident in May, was marked by yet another incident. Four rooms at Unit 3 were contaminated as a result of violations of the cleaning procedure with radiation levels two to seven times higher than the maximum acceptable limit registered.

Ukraine’s Environment and Nuclear Safety Minister, Yuri Kostenko, blames the West for the decline in standards of safety. He says responsibility rests with the Group of Seven (G7) industrialised nations for putting Ukraine under pressure to close Chernobyl by year 2000 but failing to clarify how they will help in getting this done.

Reactor No. 1 is scheduled for closure by November but officials say money promised by Western governments is not being released quickly enough. “It’s clear that the level of safety being observed by staff has been reduced, and we should find ways to improve it,” says Kostenko.

“But during talks with G7 countries, they first of all point to these incidents, instead of clearly showing when and how we are going to close Chernobyl. If they would demonstrate more clarity, our staff would work more efficiently.”

Kostenko says Chernobyl’s 6,000 staff needed assurances about their future once the station was closed. “We have to show them that they have a future,” he said. “Let them know that they will be given new jobs, that new reactors at other stations will be built.”