Can the use of foreign currency derivatives explain variations in foreign exchange exposure? Evidence from Australian companies

We investigate the role of foreign currency derivatives (FCD) in alleviating foreign exchange rate exposure of Australian firms. While there is some evidence that the use of FCD reduces the level of ex-post short-term exposure, such an effect is absent with regard to the degree of foreign operations. Our results support the view that FCDs are used to hedge existing exchange rate exposures and that Australian firms, generally, are extensively exposed to currency fluctuations in the long run. While monthly exposure appears to be a function of a firm's size and financial hedging, exchange rate exposure of shorter horizons (1 and 3 months) appears to be negatively related to a firm's price earnings ratio (proxying growth opportunities)—thereby supporting the ‘underinvestment’ hypothesis. Further, the exposure of longer horizons (12 and 24 months) is positively related to a firm's liquidity, supporting the view that liquidity is a substitute for hedging.

Leukemia risk associated with low-level benzene exposure

Background: Men who were part of an Australian petroleum industry cohort had previously been found to have an excess of lympho-hematopoietic cancer. Occupational benzene exposure is a possible cause of this excess.

Methods: We conducted a case-control study of lympho-hematopoietic cancer nested within the existing cohort study to examine the role of benzene exposure. Cases identified between 1981 and 1999 (N = 79) were age-matched to 5 control subjects from the cohort. We estimated each subject's benzene exposure using occupational histories, local site-specific information, and an algorithm using Australian petroleum industry monitoring data.

Results: Matched analyses showed that the risk of leukemia was increased at cumulative exposures above 2 ppm-years and with intensity of exposure of highest exposed job over 0.8 ppm. Risk increased with higher exposures; for the 13 case-sets with greater than 8 ppm-years cumulative exposure, the odds ratio was 11.3 (95% confidence interval = 2.85-45.1). The risk of leukemia was not associated with start date or duration of employment. The association with type of workplace was explained by cumulative exposure. There is limited evidence that short-term high exposures carry more risk than the same amount of exposure spread over a longer period. The risks for acute nonlymphocytic leukemia and chronic lymphocytic leukemia were raised for the highest exposed workers. No association was found between non-Hodgkin lymphoma or multiple myeloma and benzene exposure, nor between tobacco or alcohol consumption and any of the cancers.

Conclusions: We found an excess risk of leukemia associated with cumulative benzene exposures and benzene exposure intensities that were considerably lower than reported in previous studies. No evidence was found of a threshold cumulative exposure below which there was no risk.

Health watch exposure estimates:do they underestimate benzene exposure

A nested case–control study found that the excess of leukemia, identified among the male members of the Health Watch cohort, was associated with benzene exposure. Exposure had been retrospectively estimated for each individual occupational history using an algorithm in a relational database. Benzene exposure measurements, supplied by Australian petroleum companies, were used to estimate exposure for specific tasks. The tasks carried out within each job, the products handled, and the technology used, were identified from structured interviews with contemporary colleagues. More than half of the subjects started work after 1965 and had an average exposure period of 20 years. Exposure was low; nearly 85% of the cumulative exposure estimates were at or below 10 ppm-years. Matched analyses showed that leukemia risk increased with increasing cumulative benzene exposures and with increasing exposure intensity of the highest-exposed job. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and multiple myeloma were not associated with benzene exposure. A reanalysis reported here, showed that for the 7 leukemia case-sets with greater than 16 ppm-years cumulative exposure, the odds ratio was 51.9 (5.6–477) when compared to the 2 lowest exposed categories combined to form a new reference category. The addition of occasional high exposures, e.g. as a result of spillages, increased exposure for 25% of subjects but for most, the increase was less than 5% of total exposure. The addition of these exposures reduced the odds ratios. Cumulative exposures did not range as high as those in comparable studies; however, the recent nature of the cohort and local handling practices can explain these differences.

Exposure to wet work in working Australians

Background. The Australian National Hazard Exposure Worker Surveillance (NHEWS) Survey 2008 was a cross-sectional survey undertaken by Safe Work Australia to inform the development of exposure prevention initiatives for occupational disease. This is a descriptive study of workplace exposures. Objectives. To assess the occupational and demographic characteristics of workers reporting exposure to wet work. Methods. Computer-assisted telephone interviews were conducted with 4500 workers. Two wet work exposure outcomes (frequent washing of hands and duration of time spent at work with the hands immersed in liquids) were analysed. Results. The response rate for the study was 42.3%. For hand-washing, 9.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.9–10.7] reported washing their hands more than 20 times per day. For immersion of hands in liquids, 4.5% (95% CI 3.9–5.1) reported immersion for more than 2 hr per day. Females were more likely to report exposure to frequent hand-washing than males [odds ratio (OR) 1.97, 95% CI 1.49–2.61]. Workers in the lowest occupational skill level jobs were more likely to report increased exposure to hands immersed in liquids than those in the highest (OR 6.41, 95% CI 3.78–10.88). Workers reporting skin exposure to chemicals were more likely to report exposure to hand-washing (OR 3.68, 95% CI 2.91–4.66) and immersion of the hands in liquids (OR 4.09, 95% CI 2.92–5.74). Conclusions. Specific groups of workers reported high levels of exposure to wet work. There were differences between the profiles of workers reporting frequent hand-washing and workers reporting increased duration of exposure to hands immersed in liquids. We also found a high correlation between wet work and chemical exposure.