Minister Goodyear Consults Stakeholders on Manufacturing and Future Plans for Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity

For immediate release
May 13, 2013

Ottawa, Ontario—The Honourable Gary Goodyear, Minister of State for the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario (FedDev Ontario), met with manufacturers and stakeholders today at Invest Ottawa to seek input on the new Advanced Manufacturing Fund in Ontario and future Agency programs for southern Ontario.
"With Economic Action Plan 2013, the Government of Canada remains focused on the priorities of Canadians, including creating jobs and growing the economy in Ontario and across Canada," said Minister Goodyear. "My colleagues and I are participating in roundtable discussions to ensure we continue to develop programs that work for businesses, workers and communities."

Since its launch in 2009, the Agency has made significant progress in creating jobs and growing the economy. However, Ontario remains under considerable pressure, and more than ever our businesses and workers need to be more innovative and productive, and strive to access new markets.

In Budget 2013, the Government of Canada demonstrated its continued commitment to workers, families and communities in southern Ontario with the renewal of FedDev Ontario.
Economic Action Plan 2013 provides $920 million for FedDev Ontario over five years, including $200 million for a new Advanced Manufacturing Fund in Ontario, starting on April 1, 2014.

Minister Goodyear and Members of Parliament are meeting with manufacturers, business and academia across Ontario to gather feedback on challenges, opportunities and ideas for the development and implementation of new programs.

This morning, Minister Goodyear met with a group of firms and manufacturing stakeholders to discuss the Advanced Manufacturing Fund in Ontario. Input was provided on the expected outcomes of the Fund, as well as on proposed program parameters.
At a second meeting, stakeholders provided their views on potential areas of focus for FedDev Ontario programs including: support for innovation and commercialization, business growth, productivity and communities.

With renewed funding, FedDev Ontario will continue to act as a convenor, advocate and catalyst to support the development of a prosperous and globally competitive southern Ontario economy.

Details of new programming will be posted on the Agency's website at www.FedDevOntario.gc.ca as they become available, so stakeholders are encouraged to check back regularly.

To learn more, please visit www.FedDevOntario.gc.ca or call 1-866-593-5505.
Follow us on Twitter @FedDevOntario

– 30 –

For more information, contact:
Michele-Jamali Paquette
Director of Communications
Office of the Honourable Gary Goodyear
613-947-2956
Media Relations
FedDev Ontario
416-954-6652

Long lines continue for wind turbine work

Friday, May 3, 2013

Long lines continue for wind turbine work

By Dave Johnson, The Tribune

Thursday, May 2, 2013 6:34:10 EDT PM

Job seekers are lined up in front of Job Gym on East Main St. for the second day trying to get a position at PowerBlades Inc., a German wind turbine manufacturer opening up a blade plant in Welland in July.

WELLAND - With resumes in hand, more job seekers lined East Main St. in front of Job Gym Thursday morning, hoping to land one of 125 initial positions at PowerBlades Inc., or possibly one of the 75 to follow.

Job Gym manager Deanna Villella had expected at least 600 people to pass through its downtown doors in hopes of landing a future at the manufacturing plant on the east side of the Welland Canal.

Hamburg, Germany-based REpower Systems is setting up shop for its subsidiary on Rusholme Rd. Production is expected to start in July.

“From our perspective, things are going really well,” Villella said of the job hunt. “The employer is really happy with the candidates coming through and the people they are meeting with. With 200 jobs to fill, they have to see a lot of people.”

People who lined the street on Wednesday and Thursday were asked to meet criteria for production workers, with experience in manufacturing of plastic parts and surface finishing, an ability to read blueprints, experience with composites manufacturing, and certification for overhead cranes and forklift. Quality inspector and laboratory technicians are sought with experience in composites; and production/maintenance/support technicians are also required.

“People who met the criteria were given a number to meet with the employer for a face-to-face interview,” said Villella, adding there were seven people from the company on hand at Job Gym.

Though they were trying to keep interviews short, between five and 10 minutes, to keep people moving through the line and process, Villella said some interviews were taking a while. Seventy people were asked to come back on Thursday for interviews because of the huge lineups on Wednesday.

Second interviews were set up by the employer for those people that made it through the first interview.

“We’re happy to help the employer,” said Villella, who walked the lineup on Wednesday. “Our staff have been working 12 to 14 hours, but their spirits are positive.

 © 2012 St. Catharines Standard. All rights reserved. The St. Catharines Standard are members of Canoe Sun Media Community Newspapers.

Powered by Fatwire

Employer and Supervisor fined after Co-op Student Injured

News Release

CRS Specialties Inc. and Supervisor Fined $59,000 After Co-op Student Injured

April 9, 2013 4:20 pm  Ministry of Labour

St. Catharines, ON - CRS Specialties Inc., a Welland manufacturer of rebar bending equipment, was fined $55,000 for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a student, working there as a co-operative education placement, was injured. A further fine of $4,000 was imposed on a supervisor for a similar violation of the act during the investigation of the incident.

On March 23, 2011, at the company's Welland workplace, the student was taking apart a fan and washing it in a Varsol bath. When finished, the student was told to start a welding task. When beginning the task, the young worker was wearing a polyester-blend sweatshirt over overalls. Polyester materials are susceptible to ignition and should not be worn while welding. The student was not supplied with a welding jacket, welding sleeves, neck shroud or flame-retardant clothing. The supervisor did not intervene to make sure the student removed the sweatshirt and had sufficient apparel to prevent injury.

While the student was welding, the sweatshirt ignited and caught fire. The student suffered second degree burns.

Later, on March 28, 2011, while the Ministry of Labour was investigating that incident, an inspector saw another worker in the same workplace not wearing apparel sufficient to prevent injury while welding. The worker was wearing a polyester-blend sweatshirt and only one welding sleeve.

CRS Specialties Inc. pleaded guilty to failing to ensure that a competent person was appointed as supervisor.

Supervisor Chad Corriveau pleaded guilty to failing to ensure that a worker was wearing apparel sufficient to protect the worker from injury while welding.


The fines were imposed by Justice of the Peace B. Phillips. In addition to the fine, the court imposed a 25-per-cent victim fine surcharge, as required by the Provincial Offences Act. The surcharge is credited to a special provincial government fund to assist victims of crime.


Court Information at a Glance

Location:                      Ontario Court of Justice
                                      71 King St.
                                      St. Catharines, ON

Judge:                          Justice of the Peace B. Phillips

Date of Sentencing:     April 4, 2013

Defendant:                   CRS Specialties Inc.

Matter:                         Occupational Health and Safety

Conviction:                  Ontario Regulation 851, Section 84
                                      Occupational Health and Safety Act,
                                      Section 25(2)(c), Section 27(1)(a)

Crown Counsel:           Daniel Kleiman

Ontario Enhancing Enforcement to Protect Workers

Ministry of Labour Increases Proactive Employment Standards Inspections

• Issued: September 17, 2012

NEWS

Ontario will help ensure fairness in the workplace by enhancing the enforcement of the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA), including the hiring of additional officers and staff.

The enhanced enforcement will include more proactive inspections. These inspections encourage workplace parties to comply with the ESA before serious violations arise and complaints are filed. Complaints can be costly and time-consuming for businesses. An initial $3 million, two-year investment will allow for 18 additional Employment Standards Officers and staff.

The inspections are also aimed at educating employers and employees about their rights and responsibilities under the ESA, which sets minimum standards for entitlements such as wages, hours of work and public holidays.

The ministry is committed to protecting vulnerable workers, meeting the needs of a changing workforce and helping employers understand their responsibilities. Protecting workers is part of the McGuinty government’s continued commitment to ensuring a strong economy and that all Ontarians are treated fairly.

QUICK FACTS

• Since 2004, the ministry’s Employment Standards Program has recovered more than $90 million in wages and other monies owed to employees through inspections, claims and collections.
• The Employment Standards Information Centre (1-800-531-5551) provides service in 23 languages – from Arabic to Vietnamese.

LEARN MORE

Learn more about Ontario’s employment standards, along with resources, tools and calculators for employees and employers.

Bill Killorn, Minister’s Office, 416-326-7708
Matt Blajer, Communications Branch, 416-326-7405

ontario.ca/labour-news
Disponible en français

Bill 160 in effect as of April 1, 2012

 BILL 160 (what are you?)

 30.  The short title of this Act is the Occupational Health and Safety Statute Law Amendment Act, 2011.

EXPLANATORY NOTE

This Explanatory Note was written as a reader’s aid to Bill 160 and does not form part of the law.  Bill 160 has been enacted as Chapter 11 of the Statutes of Ontario, 2011.

The Bill amends the Occupational Health and Safety Act and the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997.

Amendments to the Occupational Health and Safety Act

Section 4.1, which specifies the Minister’s responsibility for the administration of the Act and sets out some of the Minister’s powers and duties in administering the Act, is added to Part II of the Act.

The Act is amended to allow the Chief Prevention Officer, appointed under Part II.1 of the Act, to establish standards for training programs and to approve programs that meet the standards.  

The Chief Prevention Officer may also establish standards that a person must meet in order to become an approved training provider and may approve a person who meets the standards as a training provider with respect to one or more approved training programs and may collect information about workers’ successful completion of approved training programs for the purpose of maintaining a record.

Section 7.6, which allows the Chief Prevention Officer to establish training and other requirements that a member of a joint health and safety committee must fulfil in order to become a certified member, is added to the Act.  The Chief Prevention Officer may certify a committee member who meets the requirements.

Section 7.7 permits the Chief Prevention Officer to delegate certain powers and duties under sections 7.1 to 7.6 to an employee in the Ministry of Labour.

Section 8 of the Act is amended to require a constructor or employer to ensure that health and safety representatives receive training to enable them to effectively exercise the powers and perform the duties of a representative.

Section 9 of the Act is amended to allow either co-chair of a joint health and safety committee to make written recommendations to a constructor or employer if the committee fails to reach consensus.

The Bill adds Part II.1 (Prevention Council, Chief Prevention Officer and Designated Entities) to the Act.  

Section 22.2 of the Act requires the Minister to establish a Prevention Council responsible for providing advice to the Minister on the appointment of a Chief Prevention Officer and providing advice to the Chief Prevention Officer on occupational health and safety matters.  

Section 22.3 requires the Minister to appoint a Chief Prevention Officer responsible for developing a provincial occupational health and safety strategy, preparing an annual report on occupational health and safety and advising the Minister on occupational health and safety matters.   

Section 22.4 requires that the advice of the Chief Prevention Officer and the position of the Prevention Council be obtained in respect of a proposed change to the funding and delivery of services for the prevention of workplace injuries and occupational diseases if the proposed change would be significant.  

Sections 22.5 to 22.9 allow the Minister to designate an entity as a safe workplace association or as a medical clinic or training centre specializing in occupational health and safety matters if the entity meets the standards established by the Minister.  A designated entity must operate in accordance with the standards and with any other requirements imposed on it, and is eligible for a grant from the Ministry.

Part III.1 of the Act is amended to allow the Minister to approve codes of practice with respect to both statutory and regulatory requirements and specify that compliance with the code is deemed to be compliance with the requirement, subject to any terms or conditions set out by the Minister in the approval.

Section 50 of the Act is amended to allow an inspector to refer a matter to the Board where a worker alleges that his or her employer has violated the prohibition against reprisals and where circumstances warrant.  The matter cannot have been dealt with by final and binding settlement by arbitration under a collective agreement or by the worker filing a complaint with the Board and the worker must consent to the referral.

Section 50.1, which gives the Office of the Worker Adviser and the Office of the Employer Adviser prescribed functions for the purposes of Part VI of the Act, is added to the Act.

Section 63 of the Act is amended so that persons employed in the Office of the Worker Adviser or the Office of the Employer Adviser are not compellable witnesses in a civil suit or any proceeding respecting any information or material furnished to or obtained, made or received by them under the Act while acting within the scope of their employment.

Subsection 70 (2) of the Act is amended to add complementary regulation-making authority.

Provisions relating to the load bearing capacity of structures are updated to remove references to an engineering design method that is no longer current.

Other complementary and transitional amendments are made to the Act.

Amendments to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997

Part II (Injury and Disease Prevention) of the Act is repealed.  

The substance of subsection 4 (2) and section 10 of that Part (dealing with payments to constructions workers and first aid requirements that may be set by the Board) is re-enacted elsewhere in the Act.

Section 159 is amended to exempt information sharing agreements between the Board and the Ministry of Labour from the requirement that the agreement be approved by the Lieutenant Governor in Council.

Other complementary and transitional amendments are made to the Act.

Transition from WSIB to Ministry of Labour

Bill 160 amendments to the Occupational Health and Safety Act provided for the transfer of several WSIB functions, including the Research Advisory Council, from the WSIB to the Ministry of Labour (MoL). The transition of the research program from the WSIB to the MOL is under way, and the Ministry continues to build capacity. Once the Ministry’s Prevention Council is in place, the Chief Prevention Officer will initiate a review of research priorities.

In the meantime, the WSIB is working closely with the MoL on key transition issues, including the management of the Bridging the Gap competition. The 2012-13 Bridging the Gap application process will follow much the same cycle as in previous years. The key difference is that the authority for final approval of proposals no longer rests with the WSIB Board of Directors, but with the Chief Prevention Officer.

Waterloo North Hydro Inc. Fined $110,000 After Worker Injured

July 18, 2012 11:00 AM

Waterloo, ON - Waterloo North Hydro Inc., an electricity distributor for Waterloo and the surrounding area, was fined $110,000 for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a worker was injured.

On October 12, 2010, a mall was under construction in Waterloo. Workers from Waterloo North Hydro Inc. had installed transformers on site and were attempting to send power from a transformer in one location to a transformer in another location. As power was sent to the second transformer, a worker for an electrical contractor was in the area routing a metal tape through a duct. The tape came into contact with a newly energized electrical conductor and caused an arc flash. The worker was badly burned.

A Ministry of Labour investigation found that an adequate job plan for energizing the transformers had not been documented. A job plan would have identified all known hazards and implemented controls for each hazard to protect workers from injury.
Waterloo North Hydro Inc. pleaded guilty to failing to establish and implement an adequate job plan prior to installing and energizing the transformers.

The fine was imposed by Justice of the Peace Ruth Legate Exon. In addition to the fine, the court imposed a 25-per-cent victim fine surcharge, as required by the Provincial Offences Act. The surcharge is credited to a special provincial government fund to assist victims of crime.


Court Information at a Glance
Location:                    Ontario Court of Justice
                                    77 Queen St. N
                                    Kitchener, ON
Judge:                         Justice of the Peace Ruth Legate Exon
Date of Sentencing:    July 16, 2012
Defendant:                  Waterloo North Hydro Inc.
Matter:                        Occupational Health and Safety
Conviction:                 Ontario Regulation 213/91, Section 181(1)
                                   Occupational Health and Safety Act, Section 23(1)(a)
Crown Counsel:          Kikee Malik

An Ontario court has held that an employer had no duty to provide safety training to a medical manager

[author: Adrian Miedem

An Ontario court has held that an employer had no duty to provide safety training to a medical manager on a function – the use of ladders – that was outside of the manager’s job duties.
The case involved the Emergency Medical Services Manager with the Parry Sound Health Centre. The manager took an extension ladder, leaned the ladder against the outside of a building, then climbed the ladder to check a heating and air conditioning roof unit that was not working properly. When the manager was 15 or 20 feet up, the ladder gave way and he fell to the ground and was seriously injured.

The Ministry of Labour laid an Occupational Health and Safety Act charge against the employer, alleging a failure to properly train the medical manager on ladder use.

Justice of the Peace Tenant, in the Ontario Court of Justice, held that the employer was not guilty. He found that ladder use “had nothing to do with” the medical manager’s job; that the manager should not have been using a ladder; that it was not foreseeable that he would use the ladder; that he was not asked by the employer to use the ladder or to repair the roof unit; and that he was aware that the proper procedure was to call a maintenance worker.

The court asked, rhetorically, whether it would be “reasonable and necessary to provide information, instruction and supervision to a maintenance worker on the proper use of a hypodermic syringe?” and whether, if a nurse was injured hanging a piece of art, would the employer be required to train all nurses in the use of hammers?

In closing, the court stated that it does not require “super-human efforts” to raise a due diligence defence to Occupational Health and Safety Act charges, and the Act and regulations do not “mandate or seek to achieve the impossible entirely risk-free work environment”.
R. v. West Parry Sound Health Centre, 2012 CarswellOnt 7703 (Ont. C.J.)

---

Published In: Administrative Law Updates, Labor & Employment Law Updates

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.
Thank you to the © Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP 2012 | Attorney Advertising

Company Director Fined $90,000 Under OHSA After Workers Killed

  

July 13, 2012 11:20 AM

Toronto, ON - Joel Swartz, the director of Metron Construction Corporation, a Toronto constructor, was fined $90,000 after pleading guilty to violations of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after four workers were killed and another worker was seriously injured.

On December 24, 2009, six workers were on a suspended work platform, also known as a swing stage, at a construction project on Kipling Ave. in Toronto. The swing stage collapsed and fell 13 floors, killing four of the workers and seriously injuring another worker. The only worker properly attached to fall protection was held by the lifeline and pulled to safety.

A Ministry of Labour investigation found that the deceased workers had not been properly tied off to a lifeline, and had not been properly trained in the use of fall protection. The swing stage had been overloaded and it was later determined to be defective and hazardous.
Joel Swartz pleaded guilty under the Occupational Health and Safety Act to failing, as adirector, to take all reasonable care to ensure that:

• workers did not use a defective or hazardous swing stage
• the swing stage was not loaded in excess of the weight it was meant to bear
• workers were adequately trained in the use of fall protection by a competent person
• Metron Construction Corporation prepared and maintained written training and instruction records for each worker

Metron Construction Corporation was convicted of criminal negligence causing death and was fined $200,000 in relation to the same incident. Metron's conviction was pursuant to amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada relating to workplace safety which have been in force since 2004.  The criminal charges were laid by the police.

The fines were imposed by Judge Bigelow of the Ontario Court of Justice. In addition to the OHSA fines, the court imposed a 25-per-cent victim fine surcharge, as required by the Provincial Offences Act. The surcharge is credited to a special provincial government fund to assist victims of crime.

Other defendants facing charges stemming from this incident are still before the court.

Court Information at a Glance
Location:                     Ontario Court of Justice
                                    Old City Hall
                                    60 Queen Street West
                                    Toronto, ON
Judge:                         Judge Bigelow                                   
Date of Sentencing:   July 13, 2012
Defendants:                 Joel Swartz
                                    Metron Construction Corporation
Matter:                        Occupational Health and Safety
Conviction:                 Ontario Regulation 213/91, Section 26.2(1)
                                   Ontario Regulation 213/91, Section 26.2(3)
                                   Ontario Regulation 213/91, Section 93(2)(a)
                                   Ontario Regulation 213/91, Section 134(3)
Crown Counsel:         Tom Schneider

Construction Supervisor Fined $30,000 After Worker Killed

 

 

July 12, 2012 4:00 PM

Milton, ON - An Uxbridge construction company supervisor was fined $30,000 for violations of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a worker was killed.

On December 15, 2009, bridge construction was underway on the Queen Elizabeth Way over Bronte Creek in Oakville. The construction company 474294 Ontario Limited, carrying on business as Northern Machinery Services, was removing the concrete deck of the existing bridge. The president of the company, Barry Wood, was supervising. While workers were removing concrete panels from the bridge a section of the deck began to collapse. A worker fell and a collapsing concrete panel fell on top of the worker. The worker was killed.

A Ministry of Labour investigation found that Mr. Wood had been provided with a copy of an engineered procedure for safely cutting and removing concrete from the bridge deck in order to maintain its structural integrity and prevent collapse. However, this procedure had been violated. Furthermore, the workers exposed to a fall hazard while dismantling the bridge had not been wearing fall protection.

Barry Wood pleaded guilty to failing, as a supervisor, to take the reasonable precaution of ensuring that workers engaged in the cutting and removal of the bridge deck followed the engineered procedure for that task. He was fined $20,000 for this violation.

Mr. Wood also pleaded guilty to failing, as a supervisor, to ensure that workers exposed to a fall hazard were wearing fall protection. He was fined $10,000 for this violation.

The fines were imposed by Justice Stephen Brown. In addition to the fines, the court imposed a 25-per-cent victim fine surcharge, as required by the Provincial Offences Act. The surcharge is credited to a special provincial government fund to assist victims of crime.


Court Information at a Glance
Location:                    Ontario Court of Justice
                                    491 Steeles Ave. E.
                                    Milton, ON
Judge:                         Justice Stephen Brown 
Date of Sentencing:    July 12, 2012
Defendant:                  Barry Wood
Matter:                        Occupational Health and Safety
Conviction:                 Occupational Health and Safety Act, Section 27(2)(c)
                                   Ontario Regulation 213/91, Section 26.1(2)
Crown Counsel:          Wes Wilson

Town of Pelham Fined $60,000 After Worker Injured

Fines and Penalties for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act

 

May 23, 2012 11:39 AM

St. Catharines, ON - The Corporation of the Town of Pelham was fined $60,000 for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a young worker was injured.
On August 25, 2011, summer students working for the Town were repairing the lids of catch basins, which are the parts of storm drains used to collect debris. One worker lifted the lid of a catch basin with a pickaxe so another worker could apply tape to the basin. While the second worker's hand was in the basin, the lid slipped from the pickaxe and crushed that worker's hand.
A Ministry of Labour investigation found that the workers did not have a direct supervisor and they had not been shown how to do the job before. Instead, they received instructions from a manager and were sent to repair the catch basins alone.
The Corporation of the Town of Pelham was fined $60,000 for failing to provide adequate information and instructionto the workers on how to safely repair the catch basins.
The fine was imposed by Justice of the Peace Lena Mills. In addition to the fine, the court imposed a 25-per-cent victim fine surcharge, as required by the Provincial Offences Act. The surcharge is credited to a special provincial government fund to assist victims of crime.

Kaizen Your Employees

In Japanese Kaizen means continuous improvement; something we all should strive for. As a business owner or manager you look around your workplace and think of ways things could be better. How often does the thought cross your mind that the same should happen with your employees? It’s very likely that the people you’ve hired hold more potential to be better employees and could be tapping into more of their potential. Previously we’ve written about how to motivate employees and some of the benefits of cross training but these practices won’t just work to motivate your employees. Allowing your employees greater flexibility in terms of what tasks they can perform at work will ultimately lead to a more versatile workforce; illness, injuries and vacations will have less of an impact on productivity and stress levels among employees if people can move into other jobs relatively seamlessly. Next to think about is training. There are all kinds of training programs available, if employees can work better through training advocate for it. Colleges and Universities as well as business help centers will all be able to connect you with the right people to provide training for your employees, customer service is a popular choice. Maybe you’ve seen a motivational speaker or know of one coming to your city soon, invite them to your workplace to speak or provide tickets to your employees to attend an event, it may jump start a new level of commitment or motivation in your workforce.  Your employees are one of your greatest assets and are the most important factor in your businesses success. In the words of one car manufacturer marketing gurus, “Make Things Better”.

Fines and Penalties for failing to protect worker under OHSA

 M & M Painting and Sand Blasting Ltd. Fined $70,000 After Worker Injured

  

May 10, 2012 3:00 PM

Hamilton, ON - M & M Painting and Sand Blasting Ltd., of Cayuga, ON, was fined $70,000 for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a worker was injured.
On May 9, 2010, workers from M & M Painting and Sand Blasting Ltd. were painting structural steel components for a company in Hamilton. A steel sheave was resting on the forks of a forklift while workers spray painted it from below. It was not secured to the forks. A gust of wind blew the sheave, causing it to fall off the forklift and seriously injure a worker.
M & M Painting and Sand Blasting Ltd. was fined $70,000 for failing to ensure thatthe sheave was secured against tipping or falling.
The fine was imposed by Justice of the Peace Paul Welsh. In addition to the fine, the court imposed a 25-per-cent victim fine surcharge, as required by the Provincial Offences Act. The surcharge is credited to a special provincial government fund to assist victims of crime.


HRNC

What Am I Doing Here? Orientation and Training

 So you’ve hired your new employee and they show up on the first day.  That’s a good start, but will it be their most productive day at work?  Maybe it won’t be. Will it be the day that you decide if this person is going to fit at your business?  This is also not likely. 

However, that first day and the days that follow will be the most crucial time period for the new employee in terms of learning what’s expected, what they are supposed to do, how your business operates and where they fit into the larger picture. 

In making this transition a smooth and efficient process you should provide a company overview, your policies and job descriptions. This can all be told to a new employee but it’s a lot to take in so an orientation package that explains all the important aspects of your business, their job and what is expected of an employee will speed the process up. Included with this orientation package should be what is expected of them and what happens when they choose to deviate from these expectations.  This is so they can avoid any unnecessary behaviours or actions. This type of orientation is an important way to avoid misunderstandings that could cause future problems and creates a smoother transition for all parties involved. 

Training is the next important step and how this is done will vary from one workplace to another but simply expecting a new employee will do things right and in the way that your business normally does them is unrealistic. 

New employees often come into a workplace with either little or no experience in exactly the job that you have them doing.  Perhaps,  the experience they do have gave them different habits or ways of thinking than would normally be expected at your business. 

Training has to be gradual and conducted in more than one way to best deliver your message.  Be sure to take into account that some people will learn better through different methods or at a different pace. Be thorough, expect bumps in the road and make sure you ask for feedback so you know how your employee is adjusting and where they need more help.

www.hrnc.ca

Ministry of Labour: Employment Standards Officers - what they are looking for...

Proactive Inspections

Employment Standards (ES) officers visit businesses across Ontario ‘proactively’, even if no complaint has been filed by an employee. These officers will help you correct areas where your business is not complying with the Act. In most cases, a review of the following 10 standards takes place, which apply to most, but not all, workplaces in Ontario.

• ESA poster
• Wage statements
• Deductions from wages
• Record keeping
• Hours of work
• Eating periods
• Overtime pay
• Minimum wage
• Public holidays
• Vacation with pay

Officers usually provide advance notice of an intended visit. They will review your records and speak to you and your employees. If there are issues of non-compliance they will discuss these with you and, depending on the nature of the violation, they may provide an opportunity to correct them.ES Officers may also issue orders to pay, tickets or lay charges; courts may impose fines.

For more information:  www.hrnc.ca

Balancing Act: Internet and Social Media Use At Work

                      With social media outlets such as Facebook and Google+ being so popular and things like fantasy football leagues becoming a staple for many during the winter months personal computer use and even online shopping and banking are inherently going to creep into your employees minds, especially with the ease of receiving email updates on smartphones and wireless internet available nearly everywhere now. So this brings up the question of how employers should address this issue. Is it something that’s been constantly eating away at productivity, is it merely a minor distraction or is it even an issue at all. As the employer you have to ask yourself is it a problem worth addressing? what will the reaction be? And what is the best case scenario or improvement that could come of banning these distractions all together? In doing some online reading reports have suggested ideas on both sides of the spectrum; employees personal internet use is taking up hours of time each day and others saying that yes internet use is common in the workplace but productivity is almost no lower on account of that. My take is distractions are going to creep into the workplace in most cases, internet use is just one of these. Extended lunch breaks, chatter amongst employees and at times foolish games or pranks invented to add a bit of flavour to a sometimes mundane day are common at work. Taking away personal computer use, the one contact they may have outside of work in an 8-10 hour day could cause some unrest with your employees, especially the younger generations who are seemingly tapped into their network of friends, online social groups and hobbies at all times. My opinion is don’t impose a policy eliminating this practice altogether because internet use for personal interests is going to happen. I would encourage employees to do this on their breaks, lunches and at home as much as possible and suggest if it becomes a problem then some disciplinary or internet limiting policies may find their way into the workplace as a result of low productivity. What are your thought on the topic?

Recruiting; How To Find The Right People

Recruitment and hiring might be the most important factor in determining how well your business is going to run, especially in a small business where each member's contributions, benefits and drawbacks can be amplified. Compared to a large organization where it’s an entire team of maybe 100+ employees working towards the same goals whereas one poor employee in a group of ten can have a significant negative impact. So where do you start? It’s like shopping, walking into a store without knowing exactly what you want gives you plenty of options but what are the chances you’ll come out with all the things you need. That being said make a list of the “core competencies” that you’ll need in this position, what are the most important skills, knowledge, experiences and educational qualifications needed to perform the job. Next decide upon some of the secondary qualities or personality traits that would make for the ideal fit in a given position. Creating a ranking model or score sheet to track and maintain records accompanying these competencies can make your decision making process that much easier. Next is advertising. Make sure you’re doing this function in the right spots, simply posting an ad in a local paper may not be enough or attract the right people. For example, say you want an entry level IT person to join your team; advertising in a local or national paper could be a costly mistake. How many young people with an education in IT are scanning newspapers for their next job? My guess would be very few so targeting your add can greatly affect who responds. Seek professional associations, online advertising options, government job boards and university or colleges will often provide student resources for new graduates and exploring this option could reap an enthusiastic, knowledgeable individual just waiting for an opportunity to prove him or herself. Think critically about what you need, the ideal type of person for your company's “fit’ and make sure your looking in the right spots to increase your odds of finding a successful new employee.

John Ruyter, HRNC