grinnell 13.p65

Document Sample
grinnell 13.p65 Powered By Docstoc
  ISSUE NO. 13                                   MARCH 2005            Tyco/SimplexGrinnell

  p e r i o d i c a l
                                                                Corruption Update:
                                                                Oil-for-Food scandal investigation
                                                                Grinnell bolts from NH for Princeton

                                                                Legal actions in federal courts
Tough decade for   Tyco corruption: enough
Tyco, more to come to harm the customers?
for ex- execs        A dozen issues of past Fire tive practices and misuse of
     The staggering decline of Tyco                     Protection Comments covering          confidential business
International stock value in the                        the dubious doings of Tyco/           records
summer of 2002 is now legendary, if                     SimplexGrinnell are fanned out        • Shocking Deaths
not mythic.                                             over two tabletops. They go back      • Job site mayhem continues
     The subsequent fraud trial of its                  seven years to 1998.                  • Court suits: over 1,100 and
senior officers L. Dennis Kozlowski,                        Organized beside them are         counting
Mark Swartz and lawyer Mark                             related newspaper clippings. On       • Tyco/Grinnell sells defective
Belnick ended in a mistrial, which in                   the computer screen are up-to-        pipe
itself is a ripe source of spirited tales               the-minute Internet headlines.        • Tyco International charged
around billionaires’ and federal                            They treat with reports of        with accounting fraud
investigators’ campfires. A retrial                     outright fraud, workplace deaths,     • Grinnell escapes liability for
started Jan. 8, 2005.                                   insider trading, price-fixing,        explosion and fire that killed
     Tyco’s stock, which at one point                   bidder collusion, massive product     eight
fell from $60 a share to single digit                   recalls and patterns of “enterprise   • Grinnell and a sister com-
figures, is now back up to the mid-                     corruption”:                          pany are implicated in fire
$30s – but Tyco is not yet out of the                        • New court suit charges         protection system scandal
          Tough decade cont'd, pg 2                          Grinnell with unfair competi-    • Grinnell involved with
                                                                                              hundreds of lawsuits
Inside this Issue                                                                             • SimplexGrinnell/Tyco mired
Tough decade cont'd. . . . . . .2                      Kentucky fire safety                   in its second defective
Sprinkler heads. . . . . . . . . .3                                                           sprinkler scandal in four
                                                      equipment purchasers
Safety violations. . . . . . . . . . . .3                                                     years
Litigation chart. . . . . . . . . .4, 19                should be aware of                    • Grinnell loses multi-million
Hard facts. . . . . . . . . . . . .5                   information such as                    dollar verdict
Employee lawsuit. . . . . . . . . . . .5
Corruption cont'd. . . . . . . . .6                      that on C&C Fire                     • Tyco/SimplexGrinnell:
FPC Issues 1-12. . . . . . . .7-18                    Sprinkler Systems and                   record of disdain for worker
Actions in federal court. . . . . . .19                                                       safety
Sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
                                                         Inspections, Inc.
Corporate information. . . . .20                               SEE PAGE 5                           Corruption cont'd, pg 6
LASER Information. . . . . . . .20
Tough decade
cont'd from pg 1                          which commenced in December 1996            his wife... a $2,200 wastebasket, a set
woods, it seems.                          and ended in November 2003, former          of coat hangers for $2,900,... and a
     Reuters reported Dec. 9, 2004        Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s            $1,650 appointment book,” it has
that Tyco International, Inc. had         government was allowed to sell oil to       been reported.
“raised its dividend for the first time   buy civilian goods in order to ease the           While Kozlowski and pals were
in five years.” Experts credited it       impact of the 1990s sanctions on            having a grand time, the company’s
with indicating “another step in the      ordinary Iraqis.”                           situation was deteriorating, according to
company’s rehabilitation.”                    Tyco was not the only company           New Hampshire newspaper accounts.
     But the good news didn’t last        targeted in the investigation. The                In a look-back reverie written in the
long.                                     Manchester Guardian reported that           wake of Tyco’s announced departure,
     On Dec. 13, the company              the SEC had “requested documents            New Hampshire Eagle Tribune
announced it was moving com-              from several firms... to determine          reporter Andy Murray considered
pletely out of Exeter, N.H., its          whether any companies conducted             Tyco’s history as a corporate citizen.
once-upon-a-time home base. It’s          business improperly under a program               Back in the 1970s, the corpora-
transfer destination was Princeton,       that, it has emerged, was riddled with      tion was considered a good member
N.J., the Associated Press (AP)           corruption.”                                of the business community, Murray
reported.                                     This bad news was presaged by           recounted.
     On Dec. 14, the really bad           news from the New Hampshire                       “Some three decades ago, Tyco
news came.                                Union Leader that Dennis                    was a small company based in Exeter,
     The AP reported that the             Kozlowski had sold his North                N.H., that had grand ambition....” Tyco
                                                                                      grew from an awkward jumble of
                    Tyco announced it had been ordered by                             semiconductor and energy companies to
                                                                                      a global empire of industrial products.”
                    the SEC to hand over information “on its
                                                                                            “But after L. Dennis Kozlowski
                    involvement in the United Nations Oil
                                                                                      took over as chief executive in 1992,
                    for Food program in Iraq.”                                        it’s reputation began to change….”
                                                                                            “They went from an ideal corpo-
company had announced it had              Hampton home for $1.6 million.              rate citizen to a town bully,”
been ordered by the Securities and             Kozlowski, together with Mark          Newington. N.H., town planner, Tom
Exchange Commission (SEC) to              Swartz and Tyco’s general counsel           Morgan, was quoted as saying.
hand over information “on its             Mark Belnick, was charged in 2002                 Tyco was described as being
involvement in the United Nations         with looting at least $600 million from     formed in Waltham, Mass., in 1960,
Oil for Food program in Iraq.”            Tyco through a network of organized         but first emerging as a corporate giant
    Tyco would “fully cooperate,”         deals.                                      in 1974 when it bought Simplex Wire
the AP reported.                               As has been reported in many           and Cable Co. of Portsmouth, N.H. and
    The SEC was seeking the               forums, “Kozlowski and Swartz               in 1976 bought Grinnell Fire Protection
information as part of an investiga-      allegedly granted themselves hundreds       Systems. By 1982 it was boasting a “net
tion into alleged corruption.             of millions of dollars in secret low-       worth of nearly $140 million.”
    The Bermuda-based multi-              interest and interest-free loans from the         It got more into the business of
national announced in its annual          company for personal expenses.”             buying and selling other companies.
report in December that the de-                Kozlwoski’s shopping extrava-                “In one stretch, from 1995 to
mand had been made.                       ganzas included the purchase – with         1997 the company made 51 major
    According to CNNMoney,                company money – items such as “a            acquisitions” and sported 1,700
“Under the oil-for-food program,          multimillion-dollar birthday party for      employees, Murray reported.
                                                            Page 2
Grinnell sued for putting sprinkler heads in wrong place
     One would think that, if not the      Company, court records showed.             obstructions located entirely below
law, then at least common sense would          According to the suit, Aurora          the sprinklers, such as fluorescent
have lead Grinnell Corporation to put      contracted with Nyman Construc-            light fixtures, ducts or other obstruc-
the sprinkler heads elsewhere, but         tion in 1996 to build an addition to       tions.”
apparently not.                            a warehouse already existing there.            The lawsuit contended that
     Aurora Road Realty Developers         The plans called for a fire sprinkler      “Numerous of the … sprinkler heads
Company lodged a civil complaint           system to be installed, and this task      installed by Grinnell in the Addition
lawsuit against Grinnell Fire Protection   was subcontracted to Grinnell.             are obstructed by joists, bridging
in the Cuyahoga County (Ohio) Court            The early suppression-fast             and light fixtures” making the installa-
of Common Pleas April 11, 2002,            response system (ESFR) Grinnell            tion non-compliant.
seeking damages from Grinnell for the      installed turned out not to comply             Grinnell was asked to fix the
quality of its work on a Solon, Ohio       with the 1991 National Fire Protec-        mistake and correct its installation,
warehouse.                                 tion Association standards then            but Grinnell refused, leading to the
     In the case titled Aurora Road        prevailing.                                lawsuit.
Realty Developers Co. Inc. v.                  The code “specifies minimum                Aurora told the Ohio judge it
Grinnell Fire Protection, Aurora           distances between ESFR sprinkler           would “suffer economic loss as a
Road Realty demanded at least              heads and any obstructions to the          result of Grinnell’s failure.”
$50,000 for a job done during the          flow of water from such sprinkler              An entry in the court file showed
construction of an addition to a           heads, including obstructions at or        that the judge dismissed the case
warehouse in the 31000 block of            near the ceiling such as columns,          July 23, 2002. (Case #CV-02-
Aurora Road leased to The Mazel            bar joists, truss webs, as well as         467899)

4 safety violations in 1 OSHA inspection tour
    Federal inspectors found four          correction order to a $3,000 fine.         8 inches to the cement floor below.”
serious safety violations in a single      Fines imposed totaled $6,900.                   Simplex/Grinnell was fined
Simplex Grinnell job site last year,             The mot serious situation – one      $1,500 after inspectors noted that,
Occupational Safety and Health             resulting in a worker falling from a       “An employee walked and worked
Administration (OSHA) records              great height Feb. 17, 2004 –               from a roof of a wood framed
showed.                                           occured when “An employee           structure that was 8 feet 11 inches
    OSHA investigators toured a                        walked on the roof’s           above the cement floor without any
project at 313 Spook Rock                              bracing to access a            type of fall protection in place.”
Road in Suffern, N.Y. several                        pipeline and fell through the         Simplex Grinnell was also fined
times between Feb. 17 and                             drywall ceiling 20 feet 8       for instances involving the improper
April 8, 2004.                                         inches to the cement           use of stepladders. with one of the
    A number of the viola-                              floor.” Ouch!                 reports entailing a $1,200 fine,
tions the inspectors discov-                                  The $3,000 fine         records showed.
ered at Spook Rock                                          was for not deter-             Simplex Grinnell was slapped
Industrial Park, Unit 508,                                  mining “if the roof’s     with another $1,200 penalty because
involved failures to protect                              bracing drywall ceiling     an “employee used a Rigid 300 pipe
workers from falling.                                  was capable of supporting      threader whose power cord insula-
    Punishments levied in the seven              the weight of an employee who        tion was damaged” (OSHA Inspec-
unsafe situations ranged from a stern      fell through the drywall ceiling 20 feet   tion # 305775553).
                                                           Page 3
   Litigation chart
                         The above is only a partial listing of litigation involving Tyco/SimplexGrinnell and/or
                     it’s affiliated companies in the past two years. All cases are pending unless otherwise noted.
Case Name                                           Case #            File Date    Location Filed                     Amount
HRMA D/B/A Extended Stay America                    29680/2003        8/5/04       Suffolk County, NY
v. Tyco International Inc. Fire & Safety, Simplex Grinnell, et al
Simplex Grinnell v. In Phase, et al                 00273852004       7/21/04      Baltimore City-County, MD          $ 7,590.00
Simplex Grinnell v. Alcor Electric, Inc             4M1 145463        7/20/04      Cook County, IL                    $12,149.00
Simplex Grinnell v. Vision Construction             DC-008968-2004    7/16/04      Monmouth County, NJ                $ 3,100.00
and Development
Simplex Grinnell v. Windsor Construction            110035/2004       7/9/04       New York County, NY
Simplex Grinnell v. Purolite Co.                    040700634         7/8/04       Philadelphia County, PA
Carillon Crossing Condominium                       04C-06-229        6/22/04      New Castle County, PA
Association v. Simplex Grinnell
Simplex Grinnell v. Blueprint Builders, Inc.        2004-03815        6/15/04      Bucks County, PA
Sherri Wilkerson v. Simplex Grinnell, et al         04CI004660        6/3/04       Jefferson County, KY
Simplex Grinnell v. Cookerman Company               CT00319004        6/2/04       Shelby County, TN                  $ 4,137.00
Simplex Grinnell v. Greggory Meece, et al           2004CV03717       6/2/04       Montgomery County, OH              $19,529.00
Simplex Grinnell v. Gate Gourmet, et al             04VS067459        5/28/04      Fulton County, GA
Simplex Grinnell v. C&L Consolidated                49C010405CC1785   5/21/04      Marion County, IN                  $12,700.00
Properties, LLC
Simplex Grinnell v. Basic Electric Inc.             04CC05873         5/17/04      Orange County, CA
Simplex Grinnell v. Brick Hospital                  DC-005392-2004    5/13/04      Ocean County, NJ                   $ 1,996.54
Simplex Grinnell v. Randy Saunders, et al           04 CVD06310       5/7/04       Wake County, NC                    $ 2,600.00
Simplex Grinnell v. CPC Construction                2004VS066294 5/3/04            Fulton County, GA
Simplex Grinnell v. Ray Angelini, Inc.              L 003273 04       5/5/04       Middlesex County, NJ
Simplex Grinnell v. Roche Vitamins, et al           L 000184 04       4/28/04      Warren County, NJ                  $56,675.00
Simplex Grinnell, et al v. Steven Jones             00117082004       4/2/04       Prince George’s County, MD         $ 7,198.25
Simplex Grinnell v. Myatt Electric Co., Inc.        2004SC86-00717    3/23/04      Charleston County, SC
State Farm Ins. v. Western Fire Protection, et al   GIC824419         1/20/04      San Diego County, CA
Simplex Grinnell v. Cross Electrical Servc.         2004CP10-00173    1/15/04      Charleston County, GA
Simplex Grinnell v. Eretc, LLC                      DC-002026-2004    1/14/04      Middlesex County, NJ               $ 1,536.88
Simplex Grinnell v. Huxtable Electric, Inc.         40067             1/12/04      Shelby County, TN
Simplex Grinnell v. Bayshore Mgmt. Co.              3M1 183647        12/31/03     Cook County, IL                    $ 2,940.00
Simplex Grinnell v. E&M Electrical Construction     DC-003796-2004    2/27/04      Middlesex County, NJ               $ 3,100.00
Simplex Grinnell v. Northside Electronic            601685            12/3/03      Jefferson Parish, LA
Joseph & Dorlus v. Simplex Grinnell, et al          31101925          11/14/03     Philadelphia County, PA
James Morgan v. ITT Grinnell, (149 others) 31100377                   11/4/03      Philadelphia County, PA
Simplex Grinnell v. Bertrum Company                 03CA 67031        11/3/03      Brevard County, FL
Simplex Grinnell v. Lemington Home                  GD-01-24752       10/24/03     Allegheny County, PA               Lien
for the Aged                                                                                                          $35,817.37
Simplex Grinnell v. Rehm Electric Shop              3AR 1357          9/29/03      Kane County, IL                    $23,391.00
S&H Group Corp. v. Simplex Grinnell                 CV02481327        9/12/02      Cuyahoga County, OH                $26,418.45
                                                                                                                      dismissed by plaintiff

                                                                                                 Litigation chart cont'd, pg 19

                                                                      Page 4
LASER: Only provider of hard facts
     Pictured below is a good example            A contractor might very well have    a customer unfamiliar with the con-
of the kind of industry information that    numerous safety violations, regulatory    struction industry and that particular
might remain unnoticed in court and         actions, lawsuits and/or liens, labor     company’s past job performance
government files scattered around the       law violations and other business-        would have no way of knowing it.
country unless LASER brought it to light.   related controversies outstanding              Construction customers must have
     Construction users many times are      against it, or as in this example, a      such information in order to make
not able to readily verify a construction   company installing fire sprinkler         sound business decisions — and that is
firm’s stated claims regarding its past     systems that is operating “without a      why the information LASER provides
business and safety record.                 Fire Sprinkler Certificate Holder”, but   is an important asset and tool.

Tyco settles employee ‘mental’ lawsuit
    A review of a settled lawsuit showed        According Bosley, at the              court files showed.
a worker getting little sympathy from       insistence of Grinnell, she consented         The following spring, Bosley
her bosses at Grinnell Corporation.         Oct. 1, 1993 to being admitted to         presented expert evidence that she
    Carmen D. Bosley filed suit in          the psychiatric unit at St. Joseph        had gotten better and was “mentally
U.S. District Court for the Eastern         Hospital and was subsequently             and physically able to perform all job
District of Pennsylvania on Jan. 21,        released Oct. 26, 1993.                   duties.”
1999, alleging her rights under the             She returned to work Nov. 3,              Grinnell did not accept her back
Americans with Disabilities Act had         1993 and worked until Nov. 15,            and advertised for someone to
been violated.                              1993 when her boss told she “wasn’t       replace her, resulting in her lawsuit.
    The Columbia, Pa. resident and          well and she needed medical help.”            The suit was eventually settled
Grinnell employee alleged that she had          Her bosses told her to go             out of court, according to an order of
worked satisfactorily for the company       home and that she would be able           dismissal filed Aug. 13, 1999. (Case
from March 1977 until Nov. 15, 1993.        to return when she “gets better,”         #99CV-337)
                                                          Page 5
cont'd from pg 1                          subdivisions in all of its companies in           The Australian Competition and
    Individually, each story was          all of the nations it operates, might        Consumer Commission proceeded
scandalous enough. Lumped to-             very well compare to those of a small        against Grinnell Asia Pacific, Tyco
gether, however, the number of            nation – say, Belize, Bhutan or              Australia and others, charging the
regulatory, civil and criminal actions    Burkino Faso.                                corporations with an “anti competi-
they reflected was staggering.                 Consider this: the facts at issue in    tive arrangement” that affected 145
    Yet, on the eve of the second         the criminal case set to reopen New          fire protection projects and 158 fire
criminal trial of Tyco’s two former       York State Supreme Court have also           alarm projects.
top dogs, L. Dennis Kozlowski and         given rise to 41 federal civil suits now          Grinnell Asia Pacific was ulti-
Mark Swartz, Tyco International’s         proceeding in federal court in New           mately fined $3.3 million and Tyco
                                                                                       Australia $1.4 million.
                                                                                            In Pennsylvania in 2002, jury
       Kozlowski and Swartz face 31 criminal
                                                                                       verdicts assessed Grinnell Fire
      counts for looting some $600 million from                                        Protection Sprinkler millions in
            Tyco over a period of years.                                               damages in civil suits brought alleging
                                                                                       failure of fire systems it had installed.
stock was still trading on the New        Hampshire, the Associated Press                   More than 800,000 boxes of
York Stock Exchange at around $35         reports.                                     irreplaceable financial records had
a share.                                       It is reasonable to estimate that at    been destroyed, with Grinnell facing up
     With that in mind, perhaps this is   any given time Tyco companies in the         to $40 million in damages as a result.
a good time to go over the general        U.S. alone have hundreds or maybe                 News freaks following the new
situation Tyco investors and custom-      thousands more regulatory, civil or          financial crimes trial of Kozlowski and
ers face.                                 criminal actions proceeding against it.      Swartz opening may want to keep
     During the retrial, which started         Reviewing court actions involving       this background in mind as they
Jan. 18, 2005, Kozlowski and              Tyco in recent years, several stand out.     assess the defendants’ testimony and
Swartz will face “31 criminal counts           Explosions and fires at the IMC         the corporation’s track record.
accusing them of stealing $170            Chemical plant in Louisiana in 1991
million from Tyco... and pilfering        resulted in eight deaths, hundreds of
another $430 million by selling Tyco
shares after artificially pumping up
                                          injuries and an estimated $150 million
                                          in damages. It was one of the state’s
                                                                                        Ordering back
their price.”                             worst industrial accidents ever.              issues of the FPC
     A third company executive, Tyco           Grinnell had installed the original
                                                                                             The front covers of the past
attorney, Mark Belnick, was also          fire protection system in the plant. Suits    12 issues of the FPC Periodical
charged in the matter. Belnick was        alleged that the system failed to contain     are located on pages 7-18. For
tried separately and acquitted.           the resulting fires within the plant.         more information on articles or to
     Tyco/SimplexGrinnell is but one           The plaintiffs lost in that case, but    request issues, please contact
of 10 companies listed in the fire and    things did not go so well for Grinnell        LASER or visit our website,
security division of Tyco Interna-        and Tyco in a criminal case brought
                                                                                        newsletter is free of charge.
tional, which is in turn, is but one of   Down Under.
scores of companies in a complex of            Grinnell Asia Pacific Pty Ltd. and                 LASER, Inc.
corporate identities Tyco owns and        Tyco Australia Pty. Ltd. were or-                 phone: (530) 846-6352
operates in more than 100 countries.      dered to pay millions in 1999 to                e-mail:
     Thrown together, the legal           settle a massive complaint filed in             website:
actions Tyco faces in all of the          Australia federal court.

                                                            Page 6
ISSUE NO. 12                                   MAY 2004              Tyco/SimplexGrinnell

 p e r i o d i c a l
                                                           Court documents follow
                                                           trail of corporate greed,
                                                           injuries, worker's death
Tyco/SimplexGrinnell: record                                                                Tyco tycoons skate,
of disdain for worker safety                                                                public blamed for it
   So far, the 21st has not been a               nent-hopping lifestyles which featured        The 12th day of deliberations
banner century for Tyco. It is only              $6,000 shower curtains in posh             in the Tyco corruption trial
2004, and the mega-corporation has               Gotham digs and jet-set sojourns at        proved to be the last day of the
already chalked up a record of                   European islands.                          trial for two former executives,
waste, wrongdoing and disdain for                   That’s the funny part. (See story at    Dennis L. Kozlowski and Mark
worker safety.                                   right for more details.)                   Swartz, when the judge de-
   Two of its ex-executives have                    The serious part is the many injuries   clared a mistrial in their six-
been prosecuted for the criminal                 employees of Tyco/SimplexGrinnell          month proceeding.
pilferage of a staggering $600 million           have suffered – not to mention the            New York Supreme Court
from company coffers.                            perils workers continue to face due to     Judge Michael Orbus blamed
   The pair – who escaped punish-                the corporation’s apparent lackadaisi-     public anger over the blatant
ment because of problems in a New                cal attitude toward safety.                misbehavior of a lone jury
York federal jury – allegedly used                  Since 2000, the Occupational            holdout.
their ill-gotten gains to fund conti-            Safety and Health Administration              According to Orbus, it was
                                                 (OSHA) has cited Tyco subsidiary,          the misbehaving public, not the
Inside this Issue                                SimplexGrinnell, at least a half dozen     79-year-old lawyer, known as
                                                 times for several violations.              Juror #4, now infamous for her
Safety Cont'd. . . . . . . . . .2
Central Sprinkler. . . . . . . . .2,10
                                                    During the same four-year period        conspiratorial hand sign to the
OSHA. . . . . . . . . . . . .3-4                 OSHA inspectors have logged                defense lawyers, who was to
Injuries. . . . . . . . . . . . .5-6             SimplexGrinnell and Grinnell compa-        blame for his decision to let
Faulty Coupling. . . . . . . . . .5              nies at least 134 safety offenses, and     tycoons L. Dennis Kozlowski
Asbestos Fatality. . . . . . . . .6              fined it at least $ 111,000, published     and Mark H. Swartz skate on
Lawsuits. . . . . . . . . . . . .7-9             government records showed.                 charges they looted $600
Grinnell Sues. . . . . . . . . . .7                 The company has been able to            million from Tyco, Orbus said.
Mint. . . . . . . . . . . .8                     wheedle OSHA down to roughly                   “It’s certainly a shame that
Tycoons Cont'd. . . . . . . . . .9               half that sum, but the original inspec-    this has to be done at this
TV Museum. . . . . . . . .10                     tors’ initial descriptions reveal Tyco/    time. There has been no
Corporate Information. . . . . .10               SimplexGrinnell to be, at best,            finding that this juror has done
Industry Meetings. . . . . . .11                 apathetic about protecting its em-         anything wrong,” the judge
Source Notes. . . . . . . . . .12                ployees and, at worst, a committed
                                                                                                    Tycoons cont'd, page 9
LASER Information. . . . . . . .12                                Safety cont'd, page 2
                                                                 Page 7
ISSUE NO. 11                                   JULY 2003              Tyco/SimplexGrinnell

 p e r i o d i c a l
 LASER, INC. (L EGAL A ND S AFETY E MPLOYER R ESEARCH )          Litigation, Lies & Layoffs
Grinnell loses multi-million dollar verdict: Pennsylvania jury rules that defective
sprinkler system was responsible for millions in damages in document warehouse fire
   In February, two jury verdicts                 for the safekeeping of priceless           sprinkler system failed to protect
assessed millions in damages                      financial records of numerous              the warehouse and the docu-
against Grinnell for the failure of a             companies. The company sought to           ments. Over 800,000 boxes of
Grinnell Fire Protection Sprinkler                fulfill its responsibility by hiring who   records were destroyed.
system at the Diversified Records                 they thought were the most skilled            According to court testimony,
documents warehouse in West                          professionals to design and             Grinnell had caused damage to the
Pittston, Pennsylvania. These                              construct a safe warehouse        Diversified Records facility in the
judgements are only the                                         and the best fire protec-    past. Rather than correct the
most recent of scores                                              tion system that          situation and act more safely in
of civil suits                                                          money could buy.     the future, Grinnell simply chose
against Grinnell                                                           Unfortunately,    to shut down the sprinkler system
alleging failure of                                                Diversified Records       in two parts of the Diversified
their fire protection                                          had contracted with           Records facility. And in another
systems.                                                Grinnell to design and install       part of the records warehouse, the
   Diversified Records had                        the fire sprinkler system. When a          Grinnell sprinkler system was
maintained a warehouse in West                    fire leveled the warehouse in May
                                                                                                          Fire Cont'd on page 2
Pittston, Pa. that was responsible                1997, the Grinnell fire protection

Court cases charging Grinnell with installation of faulty                                    Table of Contents
sprinkler systems continue to flood the courts
                                                                                             Fire Cont'd. . . . . . . . . . .2
Fire Protection Comments continues its exclusive coverage of the many lawsuits               Layoffs. . . . . . . . . . .2-3
filed against Grinnell, including at least eleven lawsuits alleging faulty installation      Boggess. . . . . . . . . . .2
and maintenance of Grinnell’s failing fire protection sprinkler systems. In                  Customer Support. . . . . . .4
fourteen instances, customers of Grinnell have sued because their sprinkler                  Dodging the Truth. . . . . . .5
system went off or the pipes failed when there is no fire, thus flooding their               Litigation. . . . . . . . . .5-9
premises and destroying theirs offices. Tragically, seven Grinnell customers or              Liens. . . . . . . . . . . .9
damaged parties have sued because the sprinkler system did not go off when
                                                                                             Industry Meetings. . . . . .10
there was a fire. Some of the cases allege that persons died in the fires that
                                                                                             Source Notes. . . . . . .11-12
Grinnell’s fire protection systems failed to quench.
                                                                                             Corporate Information. . . . . . 12
                                                                  See Litigation page 5
                                                                                             LASER Information. . . . . . . 12
                                                                  Page 8
ISSUE NO. 10                            SEPTEMBER 2002          SimplexGrinnell/Tyco

 p e r i o d i c a l
                                                                       and Possible
   Scandals are engulfing Tyco,                  Tyco be far behind? What can           Savvy SimplexGrinnell/Tyco
SimplexGrinnell’s parent company.                SimplexGrinnell/Tyco customers         customers may find it prudent to
The Tyco CEO is hauled off in                    do now to protect themselves?          begin hiring other fire protection
handcuffs. Several class action                     If and when SimplexGrinnell/        companies for maintenance and
suits are pending against                        Tyco files for bankruptcy, all con-    installation work on their systems.
SimplexGrinnell/Tyco alleging                    tracts and warranties for the opera-   That way, they have warranties and
accounting and stock fraud. Tyco’s               tions and maintenance of               contracts with non Simplex-
stock price plummets. After the                  SimplexGrinnell/Tyco manufac-          Grinnell/Tyco entities should
destruction of Enron, can the                    tured and installed equipment could    SimplexGrinnell/Tyco file
bankruptcy of SimplexGrinnell/                   be voided by the bankruptcy courts.    bankruptcy.

   There are other financial                     file bankruptcy soon because             In Pennsylvania alone,
ticking time bombs hidden                        of the potential liability from        Grinnell is a defendant in
within Grinnell/Tyco. Specifi-                   many pending asbestos-related          over 150 court suits, most of
cally, hundreds of asbestos                      suits. Many are aware that             which are asbestos liability
liability lawsuits are pending                   asbestos claims have already           claims. Since recent verdicts
against Grinnell in many                         thrown companies such as
jurisdictions. These suits,                      Johns-Mansville into bank-             MORE LITIGATION CONTINUED ON
                                                 ruptcy and re-organization to          PAGE 2
filed by injured workers or by
the family of dead workers,                      avoid and limit liability.              Table of Contents
charge that Grinnell caused or                      In Los Angeles, California,
contributed to these illnesses                   the cases against Grinnell are         VA Appeal. . . . . . . . . . . 2
and deaths.                                      bundled with other similar             Litigation Continued. . . . . .2-7
   These pending asbestos                        suits and are subject to the           Industry Meetings. . . . . .7
suits could represent a mas-                     general orders contained in
                                                                                        OSHA. . . . . . . . . . . . . .8-9
sive financial loss to                           “File No. C 7000000- Com-
                                                                                        Liens & Lawsuits. . . . . . . . .10
Grinnell/Tyco. There are                         plex Asbestos Litigation,”
published accounts stating                       although the dozens of suits           Source Notes. . . . . . .11-12
that Halliburton, another large                  each have individual case file         Corporate Information. . . . . . 12
construction company, may                        numbers.                               LASER Information. . . . . . . 12
                                                              Page 9
  ISSUE NO. 9                              FEBRUARY 2002              SimplexGrinnell/Tyco

                F PC
  p e r i o d i c a l

       SimplexGrinnell/Tyco Mired in its Second Defective
               Sprinkler Scandal in Four Years
                Millions of Fire Protection Sprinklers Must Be Replaced
   Grinnell/Tyco’s subsidiary Central            million and could take over five years          Sprinkler Company.
Sprinkler Company recently an-                   according to published accounts.                   The defective sprinklers were
nounced that 35 million of its sprin-                                                            installed in countless thousands of
kler heads on fire protection systems                                                            facilities, including day care facilities,
contain defective O-rings, and all                      Details on the                           hospitals, schools, dormitories,
must be replaced. According to a                       SimplexGrinnell                           nursing homes, apartments, houses,
July 19, 2001 press release, it was                                                              parking garages, warehouses, and
found that the sprinklers could
                                                         Corporation                             office buildings. Tests in February
degrade over time when the sprin-                        merger and                              2000, showed that the sprinklers
kler heads corrode thus causing the                    Simplex’s past                            had a 20% failure rate, therefore the
sprinkler heads not to activate in a                                                             product was denied endorsement by
fire. The U. S. Consumer Product
                                                      business history                           the Underwriters Laboratory and the
Safety Commission (CPSC) and                           to follow in the                          National Fire Protection Association,
Central Sprinkler Company, a                          next issue of FPC                          a safety advocacy group.
Lansdale, Pennsylvania affiliate of                                                                 The Underwriters Laboratories,
Tyco Fire Products, issued the press
                                                          Periodical                             which provides safety certifications
release jointly. This is the third                                                               found a 26% failure rate from the
largest product replacement program                “We determined that O-ring seals              sprinklers, and recommended that
in CPSC history, and it will cost                can and will degrade over time,” said           the sprinklers be replaced in Febru-
Tyco/Grinnell as much as $300                    Bob Brinkman, president of Central              ary 2000, according to press
                                                                                                      SPRINKLER RECALL CONTINUED ON PAGE 2

   In past issues, the FPC has noted                 In this latest FPC issue, there are
that Grinnell has been involved in over           even more of these very same types             Table of Contents
1,500 separate court suits. In many               of shocking court cases, with allega-          Sprinkler Recall Cont. . . . . . . . . . . 2
of these suits, Grinnell’s own custom-            tions striking at the heart of Grinnell’s      OSHA Details. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
ers and subcontractors have sued                  fire protection business. In one case,
                                                                                                 Litigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-10
Grinnell. They have charged that                  a four-year-old child lies permanently
Grinnell’s fire protection installation                                                          Source Notes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
                                                  injured with brain damage, and
and equipment have failed, either                 Grinnell is sued over allegations that         Beneficial Industry Meetings. . . . .12
failing to stop fires, or allowing leaks          Grinnell installed detection equipment         Corporate Information. . . . . . . . . 12
of thousands of gallons of water and              that failed to sound an alarm during a         LASER Information. . . . . . . . . . . . 12
damaging their customer’s premises.               fire.         LITIGATION CONTINUED ON PAGE 4

                                                                   Page 10
  ISSUE NO. 8                                     JUNE 2001                       Tyco/Grinnell

                F PC                                                    Fire Safety or
  p e r i o d i c a l
                                                                         Fire Hazard?
    Grinnell Makes and Supplies
     Pipes with Pin Holes – Big,
     Watery Mess at Ohio Bank
  Defective fire suppression system ruins high profile opportunity for Ohio contractor who hired Grinnell

  Pinholes in fire suppres-                       tection company out of                    Bank was searching for another
sion system pipes manufac-                        Westerville, Ohio, purchased 3”           contractor and Empire Fire Ser-
tured and supplied by Grin-                       and 4” galvanized schedule #10            vices had to sue Grinnell Fire
nell Fire Protection Systems                      piping from Grinnell, it did not          Protection Systems for the costs
led to costly delays and                          expect the pipe installed through-        of tearing out the bad pipe, testing
reinstallation of a fire pro-                     out the financial institution to          it to determine there were pin-
tection system in a regional                      leak.(neither did the customer,           holes throughout, buying new pipe
bank, according to the com-                       Fifth Third Bank, who had given           in good condition, and reinstalling
pany that installed the pipe                      Empire Fire Services Inc. a high-         the pipe.
and had to sue Grinnell to                        profile contract to make the                 After a watery mess led to the
settle the entire mess.                           installation of the critical fire         realization that it had not gotten
  When Empire Fire Ser-                           suppression equipment).                   its money’s worth, Fifth Third
vices Inc., a small fire pro-                       Before it was over, Fifth Third         FAULTY MATERIALS CONTINUES ON PAGE 2

                                                                                             Table of Contents
BLACKENED FISH: GRINNELL'S SYSTEM                                                           Long John Silver’s Continued. . . . . .2
FAILS IN LONG JOHN SILVER'S RESTAURANT                                                      Faulty Materials Continued. . . . . . . 2
   When you spend a lot of                          A fire in Long John Silver’s fish and   Grinnell Customer Gets Shock. . . . .3
money on a fire suppression                      chips restaurant in Marion County led      Lawsuits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
system, you expect it to work.                   to a negligence lawsuit against Grinnell   OSHA Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
   When it doesn't, not only is                  Corporation after its fire extinguishing   Company Damage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
there a big mess in your business,               system failed to prevent the spread of     Grinnell Didn’t Let. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
but your business gets even                      a grease fire.                             Grinnell Oil Rig . . . . . . . . 3
messier because of lawsuits, loss                                                           Tyco News. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
of revenue and that unpleasant                                                              Selfish Tyco Executive . . . . . . . 7
smell of smoke from an industrial                                                           Corporate Information. . . . . . . . . . . .8
                                                 LOHN JOHN SILVER'S CONTINUES ON PAGE 2     Source Notes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
                                                                                            LASER Information. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
                                                                       Page 11
 ISSUE NO. 7                              NOVEMBER 2000                    Tyco/Grinnell

               F PC
 p e r i o d i c a l

            Updated News!
            Updated                                                                   OSHA RATES
                                                                                      GRINNELL'S SAFETY &
 Grinnell’s tangled involvement in the Omega                                          HEALTH PROGRAM AS
            Fire Sprinkler Scandal!
                                                                                         The documents released under
 Defective sprinkler installations and monopolistic business practices                FOIA show that OSHA rated
                                                                                      Grinnell’s safety program as
  Last year, several newspapers                 extensive property damage.
                                                                                      “inadequate” regarding their
and investigative TV shows like                   Now there is evidence of
                                                                                      written safety & health program,
NBC’s Dateline TV described the                 Grinnell’s own involvement in
                                                                                      their communication of hazards
Omega fire prevention sprinkler                 the Omega Sprinkler fiasco. In
                                                                                      to employees, their enforcement
scandal. The Consumer Products                  August 26, 1999 Grinnell’s
                                                                                      of their own safety & health
Safety Commission recalled                      parent company Tyco actually
                                                                                      program and their own safety
over 10 million Omega fire                      purchased Central Sprinkler who
                                                                                      training program was also rated
sprinklers, because many of the                 manufactured the defective fire
sprinklers failed to activate when              sprinkler heads giving Grinnell
                                                                                         Grinnell’s own manager con-
a fire started. Captain Teeva of                control over half the US market
                                                                                      fessed to OSHA that the job
the Fairfax County Fire Depart-                 for sprinkler heads. A complaint
                                                                                      foreman had not even been
ment reported that not only did                 against Grinnell in Boston
                                                                                      through the company’s hazard
the Omega fire sprinkler head                   charges that Grinnell installed,
                                                                                      communications program.
sometimes fail to activate to put               without permits, thousands of
                                                                                      INADEQUATE PROGRAMS CONTINUED ON PAGE 2
out a fire, other times the fire                the suspect Omega Sprinklers.
sprinklers leaked and erupted                     The Boston complaint states
when there was no fire causing                  BREAKING NEWS CONTINUED ON PAGE 8     Table of Contents
                                                                                      Inadequate Programs. . . . . . . . . 2 - 3
                                                                                      Tyco Builds More Monopolies. . . . . 4
   One of the world’s largest fire              Sixteen fire fighters from nearby
protection equipment manufac-                   departments rushed to the scene       Litigation & Liens. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
turers was itself the victim of a               as heavy smoke and fire spewed        OSHA Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
fire recently. The Grinnell                     from the transformer vault. The       OSHA Violations & Fines . . . . . . . .6
factory near Statesboro, Georgia                plant personnel scrambled to turn     Other News at Tyco. . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
suffered a transformer fire in                  off the power and natural gas         Source Notes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
their one story, brick building.                supply to the building to prevent a   News & Fire Continued. . . . . . . . . . 8
The fire department from the                    massive explosion. The
                                                                                      Corporate Information. . . . . . . . . . .8
small town of Clito responded to                firefighters ultimately subdued the
the 911 calls but they were                     blaze with water and foam but not     Beneficial Industry Meetings. . . . . .8
unable to subdue the blaze by                   FIRE CONTINUED ON PAGE 8              LASER Information. . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
themselves.                                                      Page 12
                                                 JULY 2000             Tyco/Grinnell
             F PC

  p e r i o d i c a l

News Flash!
News Flash!
                                                                            GRINNELL'S LITIGATION
                                                                            COUNT STILL CLIMBING
                                                                                Grinnell has been mired in
 Grinnell and a sister company are implicated over 1,400 state and local
          in fire protection system scandal!!                               courtsuits. FPC has undertaken a
 Charges of falsification of inspection records, bid rigging & price fixing comprehensive program of
                                                                            gathering and reporting on every
    Fire protection giant Grinnell, sion also charged that Tyco             available court suit involving
and a sister company, Tyco Aus-        falsified maintenance records, to Grinnell. This effort is intended
tralia Pty. Ltd, both paid millions show they had inspected fire            as a pilot program to examine the
in fines in December, 1999, to         protection systems at a hospital,    impact of litigation on the con-
settle a massive complaint in two      theater, college and a retirement struction industry. FPC was
Australian jurisdictions.              home, when in fact the systems       amazed that our first pass at
    The Australian Competition and were not inspected. Nonetheless. Grinnell’s litigation history
Consumer Commission brought            Tyco billed for the inspections      revealed the company was a
proceedings against Grinnell,          that were never performed.           plaintiff or defendant in over
Tyco and others, charging the          Meanwhile, the fire systems at       1,100 local and state court cases.
defendants with collusion to ille-     the Prince Alexandra Hospital        At this time, FPC has only
gally rig bids on 145 fire protec-     deteriorated to the point where      checked local courts in 25 states.
tion projects, and at least 158 fire there was no measurable flow of            Now FPC has conducted
alarm projects. The scheme was water to hydrants on five upper              initial research of Federal Dis-
“highly organized and deliberate,” floors.                                  trict Court records. Grinnell is a
according to the Commission                Because of Tyco’s knowing        party in over 300 Federal Court
report, “substantial losses resulted frauds, hundreds of persons were cases, according to LASER'S
to the consumers ... (the violations exposed to vastly increased risk       research.
were)...very serious.”                 of death by fire.                    This raises the total number of
    Most alarmingly, the commis- News Flash Continued On Page 8
                                                                            Table of Contents
                                                                            Litigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 4
   Two Unfair Labor Practice NLRB ordered Grinnell to hold an
                                                                            OSHA Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 6
charges against Grinnell were election to determine if the Sprin-
                                                                            LASER Efforts Recognized. . . . . . . 6
heard before a judge in New Hamp- kler Fitters Local Union #483
shire and the decision was an- should be certified as the collec-           List of Litigants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
nounced on February, 8, 2000. (5- tive bargaining representative for        Corporate Information. . . . . . . . . . 7
CA-28153, 28440)                  Grinnell’s Dublin and Santa Rosa          Beneficial Industry Meetings. . . . . 8
   On February 25, 2000, the facilities. (32-RC-4713)                       LASER Information. . . . . . . . . . . . 8

                                                             Page 13
  ISSUE NO. 5                               JANUARY 2000                    Tyco/Grinnell

  p e r i o d i c a l

News Flash!
News Flash!                                                                                  2 WORKERS INJURED
                                                                                             ON WASTE MGNT. JOB
                    Grinnell parent company,                                                 O’LEARY V. GRINNELL, OTH-
   Tyco International, charged with                                                              Dennis O’Leary was working for a
         Accounting Fraud!                                                                   drywall company on a job at a waste
                                                                                             management facility in Chicago when he
     On December 10, 1999, a                          The FPC believes that these
                                                                                             tripped on piping that Grinnell had left
securities class action lawsuit was              charges illustrate how a new corpo-
                                                                                             on the floor of a work area, severely
filed against Tyco International and             rate owner, such as Tyco, who is
                                                                                             injuring himself. His complaint
two of its senior officers, Dennis               interested only in profits, can misman-
                                                                                             charges that Grinnell: “Carelessly and
Kozlowski and Mark H. Swartz, on                 age what was once a fine company
                                                                                             negligently placed piping on the
behalf of all persons and entities who           and a former industry leader, namely
                                                                                             floor…creating a known dangerous
purchased Tyco stock between 12/                 Grinnell. This securities fraud case is
                                                                                             condition. Carelessly and negligently
10/98 and 12/8/99.                               only the latest class action suits filed
                                                                                             creat(ing) an unsafe and hazardous
     Tyco and its officers are charged           against Tyco/Grinnell. Several cities
                                                                                             work area...that as a result of the
with violating federal SEC laws and              in southern California have filed a suit
                                                                                             negligent acts the plaintiff caused
providing false and misleading finan-            and are seeking class action status
                                                                                             serious and permanent injuries to his
cial information causing Tyco's stock            against Tyco over allegations that
                                                                                             body.” This case is currently pending.
to be traded at artificially inflated            Tyco's subsidiaries sold defective
                                                                                                 Grinnell and others who were on
prices. Certain officers took advan-             piping systems to those cities.
                                                                                             that job began filing a flurry of coun-
tage of this alleged insider informa-                 The FPC also believes that Tyco
                                                                                             terclaims against each other seeking
tion, selling what has been reported             has failed to comply with
                                                                                             to spread the blame for
as between 1.5 and 2.7 million shares            Fraud Continued on Page 8
                                                                                             O’Leary’s injuries. For instance,
of stock for over $170 to $270
                                                                                             Grinnell counter-sued O’Leary’s
                                                                                             employer Atlas Drywall.
GRINNELL ESCAPES LIABILITY FOR EXPLOSION                                                     Injured Continued on Page 8
   The 1991 explosions and fires at              suit charged that Grinnell’s system
                                                                                             Table of Contents
IMC Chemical in Louisiana was one of             failed to contain the fires caused by the
the worst industrial accidents in recent         explosions at the plant. Under Louisi-      Litigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 3
history. Eight people were killed,               ana law, since Grinnell had originally      List of Litigants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
hundreds were inured and there was               in-stalled the fire protection system
almost $150 million in damage to the             according to the customer’s specifica-      Courtsuits (story). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
plant and neighboring property.                  tions, Grinnell was “immunized.”            OSHA Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 7
   Many of the injured persons sued                 The Critic wonders whether
                                                                                             Source Notes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Grinnell who had originally installed the        Liability Continued on Page 8
fire protection system at the plant. The                                                     LASER Information. . . . . . . . . . . . 8
                                                                 Page 14
  ISSUE NO. 4                                    JULY 1999

  p e r i o d i c a l


TYCO/GRINNELL SELLS DEFECTIVE PIPE                                                           COURT SUITS: OVER
     As of press time, several local              many court suits we have found             1,100 AND COUNTING
governments and other parties have                charging that Tyco/Grinnell's piping            According to a comprehensive
mounted class action suits and civil              and valves have failed, causing water      court records search by the FPC,
complaints for fraudulent business                damage. Now, in a landmark civil           Grinnell has been involved in over
practices against Grinnell and its                action, the taxpayers of the L.A. area     1,100 court suits in twenty five states
parent, Tyco, charging a practice of              charge that Grinnell/Tyco ripped them      over the last several years. This
selling defective pipe. Damages                   off by selling their public agency         staggering number of suits indicates the
could reach many millions. LASER                  hundreds of thousands of substandard       potential scope of questionable and
has long suspected the precise quality            valves that were short on copper and       unsafe construction and maintenance
of Tyco/Grinnell's parts, given the               long on toxic lead.                        work done by Grinnell, as well as
                                                                                             revealing Grinnell's "take no prisoners
$1.25 MILLION LAWSUIT FILED AGAINST                                                          attitude" When it comes to disputes
GRINNELL, OTHER IN TEXAS                                                                     with their customers and clients.
     A Texas manufacturing concern                and marketed in such a manner that it           To the FPC's knowledge, this is
has filed a court complaint against               would fail and cause damage to             the first effort to conduct a sweeping,
Grinnell and others, charging that a              Flexible Foam’s property, and therefore    national review of the litigation history of
Grinnell fire detection and suppression           was unreasonably dangerous. The            a construction and maintenance
system did not properly protect their             system was not fit for the purpose for     company. And with over eleven
business during a fire.                           which it was intended, because it failed   hundred cases already uncovered in
     The company, Flexible Foam,                  during normal use and allowed the fire     only 25 states searched so far, the
suffered over $1,250,000 in damages               to occur and allowed severe damages        FPC expects that ultimately, over
from the blaze. Their complaint, filed            to Flexible Foam’s property.               2,000 cases involving Grinnell will be
on March 11, 1998, claims that                         These failures by Grinnell were a     discovered. Then we will look at the
Grinnell was negligent in its design,             breach of the contract with Flexible       scores of federal District Courts for
manufacture, installation, servicing and/         Foam, the complaint charged. The suit      additional legal disputes.
or inspection of the fire detection and           asked that Grinnell repay Flexible
                                                                                             COUNTING CONTINUED ON PAGE 8
suppression system. Grinnell’s negli-             Foam’s insurance carrier the $1.25
gent acts include: failure to properly            million they had paid in claims, along     Table of Contents
design and locate the fire detection              with court costs and attorney’s fees.
                                                                                             Litigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
and suppression system, failure to                This suit is the latest of many court
properly warn the uses of the Fire                actions filed in recent years against      Litigation Continued . . . . . . . .3 - 5
detection/suppression system, and                 Grinnell, by disgruntled businesses and
                                                                                             List of Litigants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
failure to properly adapt the design of           others, who charge that Grinnell’s fire
the Fire detection system.                        protection systems were improperly         OSHA Violations. . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 7
     The Grinnell Fire detection sys-             installed, maintained, and inspected,
                                                                                             Beneficial Industry Meetings. . . . . 8
tem was defective and unsafe for its              and which
intended purposes; it was designed                LAWSUIT CONTINUED ON PAGE 8                LASER Information. . . . . . . . . . . . 7
                                                                     Page 15

  ISSUE NO. 3                                     NOVEMBER 1998

   p e r i o d i c a l                                                 FEDERAL COURT RULES... NO
Jobsite Mayhem Continues                                                                  Corporate America
     In the last ten years Grinnell has been cited in almost every state by               Praises FPC
OSHA and fined hundreds of thousands of dollars. It appears that this                          Many corporate construction
practice is continuing. As of August of 1998, Grinnell has received 18                    customers are praising the in-depth,
OSHA citations, three of which were serious.                                              no-holds-barred insights they have
The citations and inspections were issued                                                 read in the FPC concerning the safety
                                                          In the last ten
involving jobs in Oklahoma, North Carolina,                                               and litigation problems in the Fire
Alabama, Colorado, Nevada, Virginia, Or-                  years Grinnell
                                                                                          Protection Industry. These corporate
egon, California, Indiana, West Virginia, Ohio,          has been cited in                giants know they are often kept in the
Pennsylvania, and South Carolina. Grinnell              almost every state                dark about the job site history of the
paid several thousands dollars in fines after             by OSHA and                     contractors they hire, and the FPC is
they negotiated reductions. It is ironic that           fined hundreds of                 the only source for the straight scoop
Grinnell, the largest fire safety company in the                                          on the fire protection contractors they
                                                           thousands of
world, can't or won't follow safety laws                                                  hire.
involving its own employees.                                   dollars.
                                                                                               Reproduced here, for your
    Fire Safety is Grinnell's primary business,                                           perusal, is a letter from transportation
yet they have received dozens of citations over electrical hazards, proper                industry leader, FedEx. FedEx
safety programs, and most importantly, fire safety issues such as lack of fire            thanks the FPC for providing it with
extinguishers, welding and cutting, as well as other fire safety issues in just           the information that companies like
the last few years.                                                                       FedEx can obtain nowhere else.
    Incompetence, lack of training, or callus disregard for safety could                  ATT, the telephone giant, recently
expose customers to potential lawsuits and inspections by regulatory                      wrote to LASER, Inc.,
agencies every time Grinnell is cited and/or inspected at their facilities. In            Praise Continued on Page 12
fact, many of Grinnell's customers have been involved in litigation with                  CONTENTS
Grinnell because of these types of safety violations.
                                                                                          1998 OSHA Violations. . . . . . . . . 2
Grinnell Training In Court                                                                OSHA Violation History . . . . . . . . . 3
     Grinnell still does not have its own valid and registered apprentice training
                                                                                          OSHA Violations Continued . . . 4-5
program. Sometime in 1999, Grinnell will be back in Federal Court, only this
time it will be in the U.S. Court of Appeals trying to overturn a previous ruling         OSHA Listing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
that denied Grinnell's unilateral apprenticeship program. At this time, Grinnell          More OSHA Listings. . . . . . . . . . . 7
has to make do with outside training programs which may or may not be
certified.                                                                                Grinnel Goes To Court . . . . . . . . . 8
     Grinnell also had another courtroom setback when the U.S. Supreme                    Courtsuits Continued. . . . . . . . 9-11
Court dismissed a Grinnell petition that sought to have an earlier federal lawsuit
reviewed after their appeal was denied. For more information on Grinnell and              Beneficial Industry Meetings . . . . 12
the courts, turn to pages 8-11.                                                           LASER info . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
                                                                  Page 16
 ISSUE NO. 2                                         JUNE 1998

      p e r i o d i c a l
                                                                        MAYHEM ON THE JOB
Grinnell's OSHA Violation History                                                              Shocking Deaths
    Grinnell is a large company with              and fight its own court cases charging            In March, 1997, Charles
many jobs every year, but that is no              negligence in the work place. In the         Blackbur, 58, and his partner were
excuse for its shocking record of                 last ten years, OSHA has cited               working for Grinnell while repairing a
OSHA violations. Grinnell violates                Grinnell for over 600 citations, and         rail-riding crane in Statesboro,
OSHA regulations, on average,                     proposed fines of almost $300,000!           Georgia, when they touched a live
almost once a week! Almost 60% of                      The frequency with which Grinnell       rail. The shock knocked both men
these violations are serious, willful, or         violates the same regulations again          25 feet to the floor. Blackbur died
repeated breaches of jobsite safety               and again, despite facing elevated           from a fractured skull. OSHA cited
regulations.                                      fines and penalties for repeated             Grinnell for violating rules on scaffold-
    Grinnell's OSHA non-compliance                violations, indicates that Grinnell either   ing, protective equipment,
creates problems for itself and its               doesn't know, or doesn't care about          lockout of energized equipment,
clients, and causes tragedies for its             work place safety laws. A troubling          Deaths Continued on Page 12
workers (including death and injuries).           litany of Grinnell's OSHA violation
The client faces job slow downs                   history drives home the company's            Sticky Allegation
during repeated OSHA inspections                  unceasing proclivity for breaching
                                                                                                   Grinnell Fire Protection Systems
and investigations, and civil suits from          jobsite safety rules.
                                                                                               was working at Stamford Hospital in
injured Grinnell                                  See page 2 for more History
                                                                                               Stamford, Connecticut in November,
workers. Grinnell must pay fines
                                                                                               1994, when Mr. Burnett, another
                                                                                               worker on the project, observed a
Grinnell Goes Back To Court                                                                    sprinkler plate "glued" to the ceiling.
      A suit filed in March, 1998, by             or select materials used in it's Fire        Allegation Continued on Page 12
Flexible Foam of Ohio, claims                     Detection and Suppression System.
Grinnell's fire protection system failed to       It also failed to properly design and        CONTENTS
protect their facility from a May 5, 1996         locate the system, failures to properly
fire.                                             warn and/or instruct the users of the        More Violation History . . . . . . . 2-4
      Flexible Foam relied on Grinnell's          system, as well as failed to properly        OSHA Violations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
skill and judgement to provide them               change, modify, alter or adapt the
with a fire protection and detection              system.                                      OSHA Violations Continued . . . . . 6
system that would properly protect                     Flexible Foam's insurance com-          Litigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
their facility from fire damage. Flexible         pany, St. Paul Surplus Lines Insurance
                                                                                               Grinnell Goes Back To Court . . 8-9
alleges breach of implied warranty of             Company, paid $1.25 million to and
fitness for a particular purpose as the           on the behalf of Flexible Foam to            List of Courtsuits . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-11
producing and/or proximate cause of               cover the cost of damages caused by          License Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
the damages.                                      Grinnell's defective product. Continued
      In this suit, Flexible claims that          on Page 8                                    Beneficial Industry Meetings . . . 12
Grinnell failed to properly design and/                                                        Publisher's Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
                                                                    Page 17
 ISSUE NO. 1                                        FEBRUARY 1998

                FPC GRINNELL,
  p e r i o d i c a l
                    A PUBLIC SERVICE PROVIDED BY:
                                                                            THE BIGGEST...
New Courtsuit Charges Grinnell with unfair Competitive
                                                                                                 fall protection and trenching continue,
Practices and Misuse of Confidential Business Records                                            even after receiving multiple citations for
   Grinnell has dominated the fire                  suffering, even while Grinnell and           violating these regulations.
protection industry for over 100                    Tyco boom. Certainly fire protection         See page 5 for more details
years, sometimes by implementing                    equipment customers in the Kentucky
illegal trade practices. The US                     area could be harmed if Grinnell's           Too Big For Details?
Supreme Court has even ordered                      questionable tactics force Koorsen, a
                                                                                                    Grinnell was cited for "failure to
Grinnell and others to cease their                  competitor, out of business.
                                                                                                 have a properly licensed manager or
Federal Anti-Trust violations. Now a
                                                                                                 technician on site," by the Oklahoma
May, 1997, courtsuit charges Grinnell               Lien On You
                                                                                                 State Health Department in August of
with a new round of unfair competi-                    Many construction companies can
                                                                                                 1997. This is surprising considering
tive activities. Koorsen Protection                 boast that they have never filed a lien
                                                                                                 that the project site was the Down-
Services has claimed that Grinnell                  or courtsuit against their customers.
                                                                                                 town Myriad Convention Center,
interfered with Koorsen's contractual               Grinnell cannot make that claim.
                                                                                                 Oklahoma City. With several offices
relationships with many of its custom-              LASER's review of public records
                                                                                                 in the state including Oklahoma City,
ers in the Louisville, Kentucky area.               shows that on many occasions,
                                                                                                 Tulsa, and Yukon, you would think
The complaint asks for an injunction                Grinnell has filed liens against their
                                                                                                 Grinnell could avoid these type of
against Grinnell to prevent its use of              customer's property,
Koorsen's confidential business                     even when their dispute was with
records which were wrongfully                       another contractor. Grinnell has also        CONTENTS
acquired by Grinnell from a former                  been involved in dozens of courtsuits.
                                                                                                 Grinnell: Flood or Fire. . . . . . . . . . 2
Koorsen employees.                                  Sometimes their sprinkler systems go
   As this court case alleges, Grinnell             off and cause water damage to a              Auto Accidents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
and it's parent, Tyco, continue with                building even when there is no fire.         Litigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
their controversial and aggressive                  Other times the sprinklers don't go off
tactics, including takeovers and anti-              at all, allowing a fire to damage a          Grinnell Goes To Court . . . . . . . . . 4
competitive moves against other fire                facility. Grinnell's valves have failed,     Court Cont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
protection equipment companies.                     causing water damage, and massive
                                                                                                 License Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   Grinnell is bigger, but is it better?            releases of gasoline. See pages 2-5 for
Better for whom? It may be better for               more details                                 Do You Have Problems . . . . . . . . . 6
Grinnell's own bottom line, but                                                                  OSHA Violations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
records at many courts and adminis-                 OSHA Violations
trative agencies indicate that Grinnell's              OSHA has cited Grinnell for               Calendar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
own customers, employees, and                       hundreds of safety violations, and
                                                                                                 Labor Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
suppliers may be                                    assessed tens of thousands of dollars
                                                    in fines. Grinnell's ongoing violations of   Flood Of Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
                                                    important rules governing                    Editor's Note. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
                                                                     Page 18
Litigation chart
Cont’d from page 4

Case Name                                        Case #             File Date      Location Filed                    Amount
Simplex Grinnell v. Skycrest Corp.               34220187803        9/9/03         Tarrant County, TX
Simplex Grinnell v. Garney Morris, Inc., et al   2003-05448         8/26/03        Bucks County, PA                  judgment entered

Simplex Grinnell v. Skoda Construction           03CVF01050         8/13/03        Cuyahoga County, OH               $ 7,594.00
Simplex Grinnell v. Data Transmission Services   3M1 149642         8/5/03         Cook County, IL                   $21,028.00
Simplex Grinnell v. Lisco Hotels, Inc.           DC-014132-2003     7/31/03        Middle Sex County, NJ
Simplex Grinnell v. Roy Hansen, et al            GIN031625          7/29/03        San Diego County, CA
James C. Kause v. Simplex Grinnell, et al        3L 8490            7/23/03        Cook County, IL                   $30,000.00
Simplex Grinnell v. Aegean Constructors          49C010307CC02049   7/22/03        Marion County, IN                 $ 7,784.00
Yvette Eggleston v. Simplex Grinnell, et al      00203012003        5/29/03        Baltimore City-County, Md.        $ 3,830.29
Prager Moving & Storage v. Simplex Grinnell, et al 3M1 131834       5/19/03        Cook County, IL                   $13,898.00
Simplex Grinnell v. Sheila DeSilva, et al        A0303425           5/2/03         Hamilton County, OH               $27,061.00
Simplex Grinnell v. Elena Splica, et al          CV-6234-03         6/13/03        Bernalillo County, NM             $ 2,552.00
Kathleen Moro v. Simplex Grinnell, et al         GIC809736          4/25/03        San Diego County, CA
Simplex Grinnell v. Bo Berg Communications       3AR 550            2/28/03        Du Page County, IL                $ 9,390.00
Simplex Grinnell v. Radco Construction           DC-000214-2003     2/14/03        Hunterdon County, NJ              $ 6,721.50
Simplex Grinnell v. BEC Electrical, Inc.         0358CV8            1/7/03         Plymouth County, MA               $ 4,669.00

Actions in federal court, Southern Indiana District
       Tyco International was one of              back to Marion County Superior                  Also filed in the same Indiana
  seven defendants accused in a                   Court for further action. (Case            federal court was Overland
  complex torts lawsuit lodged in                 #IP98-C-0419-M/S)                          Express Inc. v. Grinnell Cor-
  Indiana federal court in 1998 by                    Separately, a civil rights lawsuit     poration., which was entered
  Allendale Mutual Insurance                      was brought more conclusively              April 16, 1990, but dismissed
  Company and eight other                         against Grinnell Corporation in the        and referred to the Interstate
  plaintiffs.                                     same southern Indiana federal              Commerce Commission May 20,
       Documents from the U.S.                    court.                                     1991 after 14 hearings. (Case
  District Court, Southern Indiana                    On July 19, 1993, the Equal            #IP90-C-0789 M/?)
  showed that the case had been                   Employment Opportunity Com-                     Finally, Grinnell brought its
  filed in Marion County Superior                 mission claimed the discrimina-            own complaint in the southern
  Court originally – Allendale                    tion in Equal Employment                   Indiana district federal court.
  Mutual Insurance Co. et al v.                   Opportunity Commission v.                       Grinnell Corporation v.
  Terre Haute Warehousing                         Grinnell Corporation and after             Wayne Dairy Products, Inc.
  Service, et al – but was ordered                66 hearings the court ruled on             was filed Aug. 25, 1992 and
  removed to federal court March                  March 15, 1995 that the case               closed March 21, 1994 upon its
  25, 1998.                                       was dismissed “due to parties              settlement and dismissal between
       There it lingered through more             report to the court that they have         the parties, court documents
  than 86 court hearings before a                 reached a settlement.” (Case               showed. (Case #ALL92-C-
  federal magistrate remanded it                  #IP93-C-0923-B/S)                          1153-M/F)

                                                                  Page 19
                                                                                     From Ch. 4 of Fundamentals of Investing, Ninth Edition; Lawrence J. Gitman and
                                                                                     Michael D. Joehnk; Publisher: Pearson Addison Wesley
Simplex Grinnell, LP v. Lemington Home for the Aged; Civil Action #GD-01-
                                                                                     "Sprinkler Contractor Shielded By State Law for Design By Others";
24752; 10/24/03; Allegheny County (Pa.) Court of Common Pleas
                                                                                     Engineering News-Record; p. 25; 9/20/99
Kathleen Moro v. Matt Brown, Simplex Grinnell; Case #A71110; 4/25/03;
San Diego (Calif.) Superior Court
                                                                                     PAST FPC PERIODICAL COVERS
Aurora Road Realty Developers Company, Inc. v. Grinnell Fire Protection;
                                                                                     FPC Periodical, Issue #1; 2/98
Case #CV-02-467899; 4/11/02; Cuyahoga County (Ohio) Court of Common Pleas
                                                                                     FPC Periodical, Issue #2; 6/98
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v. Tyco Australia Pty
                                                                                     FPC Periodical, Issue #3; 11/98
Ltd., Grinnell Asia Pacific Pty Limited, et al; Case #Q 239 of 1999; 12/14/99;
                                                                                     FPC Periodical, Issue #4; 7/99
Federal Court of Australia, Queensland District Registry
                                                                                     FPC Periodical, Issue #5; 1/00
Carmen D. Bosley v. Tyco International (d.b.a. Grinnell Corporation); Case
                                                                                     FPC Periodical, Issue #6; 7/00
#99CV-337; 1/21/99; U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania
                                                                                     FPC Periodical, Issue #7; 11/00
Allendale Mutual Insurance Co., et al v. Terre Haute Warehousing Service,
                                                                                     FPC Periodical, Issue #8; 6/01
Tyco International, et al; Case #IP98-C-0419-M/S; Filed 3/25/98; U.S. District
                                                                                     FPC Periodical, Issue #9; 2/02
Court, Southern Indiana
                                                                                     FPC Periodical, Issue #10; 9/02
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Grinnell Corporation; Case
                                                                                     FPC Periodical, Issue #11; 7/03
#Case #IP93-C-0923-B/S; Filed 7/19/93; U.S. District Court, Southern Indiana
                                                                                     FPC Periodical, Issue #12; 5/04
Grinnell Corporation v. Wayne Dairy Products, Inc.; Case #ALL92-C-1153-
M/F; Filed 8/25/92; U.S. District Court, Southern Indiana
                                                                                     CORPORATE INFORMATION:
Overland Express, Inc. v. Grinnell Corporation; Case #IP90-C-0789-M/?;
                                                                                     Tyco International Financial Information; Symbol TYC; Yahoo! Finance; 1/24/
Filed 4/16/90; U.S. District Court, Southern Indiana
                                                                                     Tyco International (US), Inc. Business Report; Dun & Bradstreet; 12/30/04; http:/
Simplex Grinnell Lawsuit Records; Westlaw; 8/10/04;
                                                                                     Tyco International, Inc. Corporate Information; Tyco website; 12/30/04; http://
Duane Tankersley and C&C Fire Sprinkler Systems and Inspections, Inc Cease
                                                                                     Simplex Grinnell LP Business Report; Dun & Bradstreet; 12/30/04; http://
& Desist Order; Order #FM4661; 9/9/04
All information obtained through OSHA web site. Violation details can be found at:
Inspection #305775553; 2/17/04-4/8/04; Newburgh, NY
                                                                                                     Corporate Information
ARTICLES:                                                                                                  SimplexGrinnell, LP
"Tyco Ex-Chief Is Humbled, but Unbowed"; Andrew Ross Sorkin; The New
York Times; 1/16/05                                                                                          1 Town Center Rd.
"Tyco Lawsuits Headed for Federal Court"; Associated Press; Boston Globe; 1/
9/05;                                                                                Boca Raton, FL 33486
"Tyco Faces Inquiry Over UN Scheme"; David Teather; Manchester Guardian;                                   Phone: (561) 988-3600
"Update 1: SEC Questions Tyco on Iraq Program"; Associated Press;; 12/16/05;
"Tyco Probed On Oil-For-Food"; CNNMoney; 12/15/04; http://                                                Dean Seavers, President
"Tyco To Move Completely Out of Exter"; Associated Press; 12/13/05
"Tyco Raises Dividend"; Ruerters; 12/9/04                                                            Tyco International (US) Inc.
"Kozlowski Home Fetches $1.6m for 10-Rooms and Indoor Pool"; Jody Record;
New Hampshire Union Leader; 11/20/04                                                                             9 Roszel Rd.
"Tyco Exit Leaves Sour Taste in N.H"; Andy Murray; Eagle Tribune; 4/11/04                                    Princeton, NJ 08540
"Former Tyco Executive Acquitted"; Brooke A. Masters and Carrie Johnson;
Washington Post; p. E01; 7/16/04                                                                            Phone: (609) 720-4200
"Diversified Off Hook to Pay $40 Million in Fire Damages"; Tim Gulla;                                 
Citizen's Voice; 2/18/03
"Bank Awarded $20.5 M For Destroyed Records"; Tim Gulla; The Scranton-
Times; 12/14/02                                                                                   Edward D. Breen, Chairman & CEO
"Shareholders Take Risks But Not the CEO: Fraud at Tyco International";                                David FitzPatrick, CFO

       LASER is publishing information that contractors and companies do not and will not publish about themselves.
        LASER has relied on the public record to present this information to the public in an effort to promote
              safety, productivity, honesty and environmental compliance in the Construction Industry.
                Tyco and SimplexGrinnell have been given the opportunity to review this material for errors
                              and inaccuracies and to make corrections and suggestions.
                   If you have any suggestions or questions, please contact James Wilson at LASER, Inc.
               654 Kentucky St., Gridley, CA 95948, Phone (530) 846-6352, Fax (530) 846-5274 or online at
       For more information, visit LASER's website at

                                                                                Page 20

Shared By: