A devastating legal battle continues for Maslamony Kistan Murugan, a 70-year-old former process technician whose life has been bitterly altered by illness as an alleged result of years of exposure to hazardous substances at work.

Having dedicated nearly three decades to Shell and BP's South African Petroleum Refineries (Sapref), Murugan's struggle against the company he once served has now stretched over two decades.

Beginning his career at Sapref in 1975, Murugan began to suffer from health issues in 1996, culminating in a diagnosis of severe liver damage.

“I was demoted from technician to clerk due to my liver condition, resulting in a significant cut to my income,” he recounted, revealing that his monthly salary plummeted from R17,700 to just R5,000.

This drastic shift in fortunes was not just a financial setback; it also marked the beginning of his distressing journey through illness and legal turmoil.

In 2004, as Murugan's health deteriorated further, he left the company under disputed circumstances, having been dismissed on the grounds of incapacity.

“The inquiry about my health was presided over by company representatives, with no medical professionals involved,” he said, reflecting upon the lack of transparency and support from his employers.

"I left the company with nothing. They wanted me to sign some papers, and I refused because I could tell that those documents were not in my favour."

Adding to his daunting health challenges, Murugan was diagnosed with prostate cancer while he was still at loggerheads with the company.

During this turbulent period, he sought assistance from his union representative, only to feel betrayed when his plea for support turned into pressure to accept a meagre severance offer of R35,000.

“I worked for the company since 1975, and this union representative wanted me to walk away with just R35,000. This was daylight robbery,” he said.

“I wanted to walk away with what was due to me and compensation for the nearly two years where my salary was unjustly reduced due to my illness, an illness that arose from the workplace environment.”

Despite multiple hurdles including being dismissed in the Labour Court, Murugan pressed on. It wasn't until 2007 that he secured compensation from an insurance claim. However, he still felt robbed of the payout as it was based on his diminished salary following his demotion.

Furthermore, he said he only received the money because he's the one who sent his medical records to the insurance company after his company allegedly failed to send them.

"They sent incomplete records and then said my claim was rejected. I later decided to contact the insurance company myself and that's when I learned that my company misrepresented me."

In September 2023, he managed to obtain a further lump sum from the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act (Coida) after winning the case in Durban High Court, but despite this win, he continues to grapple with inadequate support from his former employer.

“The company refuses to acknowledge that my condition was caused by workplace toxins. Amongst other things, I want my medical aid to be reinstated, and they should also fix the demotions so that I can get my payouts calculated on the scale I initially signed up for. They can't crucify me for the demotions when it has been proven that my condition was due to work toxins.

"My lawyer wrote them a letter and they told him that my file has been closed. I still don't understand, how can you close a file if a matter has not been concluded,” he said in frustration.

He said his win at Coida emphasised the contradiction in the matter and also showed how the company allegedly mistreated him even though they were faced with undeniable medical evidence.

Murugan said his lawyer is now fighting to get the back pay from Coida as the scale used to calculate the payout was on the demotion salary.

His lawyer also got a letter from a specialist in occupational medicine, Professor Rajen Naidoo who is the head of Occupational and Environmental Health in the University of KwaZulu-Natal.

In the letter, Naidoo said medical reports show that after Murugan left the company in 2004, his liver improved, and this proves that his biological responses to toxins warranted complete and permanent removal from this work environment.

"In my opinion, there can be no case made to argue that the response he experienced on returning to the same environment in 2004 was as a result of anything else apart from the workplace toxins," said Naidoo.

IOL reached out to Sapref via email but did not receive a response. A follow-up email was sent, yet still, there was no reply.

sinenhlanhla.masilela@iol.co.za

IOL