Teranorth Construction Engineering Limited Fined $115,000 After Worker Killed

January 24, 2013 2:10 pm

Ministry of Labour

Thunder Bay, ON - Teranorth Construction & Engineering Limited, a Sudbury constructor, was fined $115,000 for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a worker was killed.

On June 24, 2011, the company was constructing new eastbound and westbound bridge decks on Highway 11/17 at the Mackenzie River in the Municipality of Shuniah. Precast concrete bridge spans were already installed and workers were pouring liquid grout into the joints. A worker was on an elevated work platform beneath the bridge decks sealing leaks caused by liquid grout seeping through the concrete spans. The elevated work platform was on a sloped surface when it overturned, fatally injuring the worker.

Teranorth Construction & Engineering Limited pled guilty to failing to ensure that the elevated work platform was used only on a firm, level surface.

The fine was imposed by Justice Dianne P. Baig. 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
                                    1805 Arthur St.
                                    Thunder Bay, ON

Judge:                         Justice Dianne P. Baig

Date of Sentencing:     January 21, 2013

Defendant:                   Teranorth Construction & Engineering Limited

Matter:                         Occupational Health and Safety

Conviction:                  Ontario Regulation 213, Section 148(b)

Crown Counsel:           Shantanu Roy

Stacey Electric Company Limited Fined $150,000 After Worker Killed

November 21, 2012 1:10 pm

 

Ministry of Labour

Toronto, ON - Stacey Electric Company Limited, a Toronto company, was fined $150,000 on November 19, 2012, for violations of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after one worker was killed and another worker was injured.

On December 23, 2010, two Stacey Electric workers were repairing a broken beacon at a railway underpass on Bathurst St. near Dupont St. in Toronto. The beacon was on a cement median between four lanes of traffic. One worker was in the bucket of a boom truck that had been extended over a lane of traffic next to the median. The other worker was standing on the median assisting the worker in the bucket. There were no traffic control measures such as signs or traffic cones in place. While the workers were repairing the beacon, a bus struck the boom attached to the bucket holding one of the workers. The worker on the median was struck and killed by the bus and the bucket as it fell to the ground. The other worker was also injured.

A Ministry of Labour investigation found that there was no traffic protection plan in place during the repair operation.

Stacey Electric Company Limited plead guilty to failing to take the reasonable precaution of ensuring that their workers prepare a traffic protection plan for their protection.

The fine was imposed by Justice of the Peace Donald Buchanan. 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
                                    1530 Markham Rd.
                                    Toronto, ON

Judge:                         Justice of the Peace Donald Buchanan

Date of Sentencing:    November 19, 2012

Defendant:                  Stacey Electric Company Limited

Matter:                        Occupational Health and Safety

Convictions:                Occupational Health and Safety Act, Section 25(2)(h)

Crown Counsel:          Mike Nicol

Safety is ultimately employer’s responsibility, not committee’s: Arbitrator

This is an interesting decision - the union grieved extra PPE protection for its' members.

Joint health and safety committee had power to prescribe safety equipment but employer could still do so without committee’s recommendation

November 2, 2012

The health and safety of employees is ultimately the responsibility of the employer and can’t be delegated to a joint health and safety committee, an Ontario arbitrator has ruled.

Gerdau Ameristeel, a steel manufacturing company, introduced a policy in its Whitby, Ont., plant requiring employees to wear chin straps on their safety headgear. The union grieved the policy, noting that the collective agreement required Gerdau to take all reasonable precautions for the safety of employees — in line with health and safety legislation — and to provide all personal protective equipment prescribed by the joint health and safety committee. The union argued this gave the power to approve safety equipment to the joint committee, not the company.

The arbitrator found that the Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act placed the main responsibility for employee health and safety with the employer, including the assigning of personal protective equipment. This legal responsibility did not diminish with the existence of a joint health and safety committee and a collective agreement allowing the committee to recommend safety equipment, said the arbitrator. If the employer didn’t have the ability to dictate equipment, then it would be susceptible to being charged and prosecuted for safety conditions over which it had no control.

The arbitrator ruled that Gerdau was entitled to prescribe personal protective equipment for employees, independent of the joint health and safety committee, regardless of the collective agreement provision giving the committee a say in prescribing equipment. The greivance was dimissed.

“Although I do not doubt this union’s commitment to the safety of its members, I do not believe that the employer can avoid its legal obligation, even when acting in good faith, to take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances for theprotection of a worker,” said the arbitrator.

For more information see:

•Gerdau Ameristeel v. U.S.W., Local 6571, 2012 CarswellOnt 9066 (Ont. Arb. Bd.).

© Copyright Canadian HR Reporter, Thomson Reuters Canada Limited. All rights reserved.

http://www.employmentlawtoday.com/articleview/16594-safety-is-ultimately-employers-responsibility-not-committees-arbitrator

 

Goldcorp Canada Ltd. Fined $350,000 After Worker Killed

Timmins, ON - Goldcorp Canada Ltd., the operator of Hoyle Pond, a Timmins mine, was fined $350,000 today for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a worker was killed.

On March 10, 2011, a worker was operating a scoop tram in a production area of the mine. A scoop tram is a type of mobile equipment used to pick up and move broken rock underground. Two workers approached the tram on foot and had a conversation with its operator about work to be done that day. The tram operator drove away to get a piece of equipment. While the tram was gone one of the two workers on foot began laying electrical wire in the tram's work zone and a third worker entered the area on foot. The tram operator returned to the area thinking there were only two workers there. The operator saw two cap lamps near the entrance and proceeded into the work zone unaware that there was a worker laying electrical wire there. That worker remained unseen and was run over and killed by the machine.

A Ministry of Labour investigation found that at the time of the incident Goldcorp had a procedure in place to alert equipment operators of workers in their area. This procedure required the placement of signs and flashing lights. While the signs and lights were readily available at the time of the incident, the procedure was not applicable in the area where the incident occurred.

Goldcorp Canada Ltd. pleaded guilty to failing to ensure that:

• there was a safety procedure in place in the area of the incident to protect workers when mobile equipment was being used
• workers were instructed on such a procedure
• the procedure was implemented through appropriate supervision

The fine was imposed by Justice of the Peace Alex Spence. 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:                    City Hall Council Chambers
                                      220 Algonquin Blvd. E.                                      Timmins, ON

Judge:                         Justice of the Peace Alex Spence



Date of Sentencing:    October 11, 2012

Defendants:                 Goldcorp Canada Ltd.

Matter:                           Occupational Health and Safety

Convictions:               Occupational Health and Safety Act, Section 25(2)(a)

Crown Counsel:        Wes Wilson

TKPL & Associates Ltd. Fined $80,000 After Worker Killed

September 14, 2012 2:35 PM

Parry Sound, ON - TKPL & Associates Ltd., operator of a grocery store in Sundridge, ON, was fined $80,000 for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a worker was killed.

On February 4, 2011, a worker at the grocery store was arranging items on shelves while standing on a stepladder. To reach the top shelf, the worker had to stand on the top cap of the ladder, which was not intended as a step. While working from the top cap the worker lost balance and fell to the floor, suffering a fatal head injury.

A Ministry of Labour investigation found that it was common practice in the store for workers to stand on the top cap of this type of stepladder to reach shelves. However the stepladder was not appropriate equipment for the task given the workers' need to stand on the top cap.

TKPL & Associates Ltd. pleaded guilty to failing to take the reasonable precaution of providing appropriate equipment to reach shelves for the protection of a worker.

The fine was imposed by Justice of the Peace Marcel Bedard. 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.

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

Inquest Into The Death Of Mark Pagavathsing Announced

Why are inquests into accidental employment deaths done?

It is by reviewing the accident in detail and hearing all the evidence presided over by the

inquest coroner that new facts or issues may be revealed.

After hearing all the evidence, the jury deliberates.  Frequently, they come up with suggestions that can make workplaces safer for everyone.

Sometimes new laws are made from the results of the inquest which will help everyone in the workplace to be more aware and to work more safely.

June 21, 2012 10:05 AM

Brampton — Dr William J. Lucas, Regional Supervising Coroner for Central Region, Brampton Office, today announced that an inquest will be held into the death of Mark Pagavathsing.
Mr. Pagavathsing, aged 46, died on August 18, 2011 from injuries received during his employment on a construction project.

The inquest will examine the events surrounding Mr. Pagavathsing's death.  The jury may make recommendations aimed at preventing similar deaths.

The inquest is expected to last two days and to hear from approximately four witnesses.
The inquest will begin at 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, September 19, 2012 at the Aurora Municipal Offices, 1 Municipal Drive.  Dr. Mary Beth Bourne will preside as inquest coroner and Mr. Robert DeChellis will be counsel to the coroner.

CONTACTS

• Dr. William J. Lucas
  Regional Supervising Coroner for Central Region, Brampton Office
  905-874-3972
  

Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services
ontario.ca/safety

www.hrnc.ca 

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 for violations of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a worker was injured

Court Bulletin

Ministry of Labour 12-17 For Immediate Release
March 15, 2012

Manufacturer Fined $50,000 After Worker Injured

Brampton, ON – Surteco Canada Ltd., carrying on business as Doellken-Woodtape, an international manufacturer of plastic edging for use on furniture, was fined $50,000 for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a worker was injured.
On March 30, 2010, a worker at the company’s Brampton plant was cleaning out a hopper. The worker reached a hand into the hopper while an auger inside it was slowly rotating. The worker’s hand was injured when it was caught by the auger and trapped against the hopper wall.
Surteco Canada Ltd., carrying on business as Doellken-Woodtape, pleaded guilty to failing to ensure that the auger had stopped rotating before the worker began cleaning the hopper.
The fine was imposed by Justice of the Peace Thomas McKeogh. 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 Bulletin

Ministry of Labour  12-18 For Immediate Release
March 15, 2012

Con Cast Pipe Inc. Fined $55,000 After Worker Injured

Guelph, ON – Con Cast Pipe Inc., a Guelph manufacturer of concrete infrastructure products, was fined $55,000 for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a worker was injured.
On August 24, 2010, workers were pouring concrete into a steel form. One worker was standing beside the form and using a remote control to operate an overhead crane to pour buckets of concrete into the form. Without warning, one side of the steel form detached and fell on the worker. The worker suffered multiple fractures and a punctured lung.
A Ministry of Labour investigation found that the welds used to hold the form together were inadequate to resist the weight of the wet concrete being poured into the form.
Con Cast Pipe Inc. pleaded guilty to failing to take the reasonable precaution of ensuring that the form was designed and constructed to resist all loads and forces which were likely to be applied to it.
The fine was imposed by Justice of the Peace Adriana Magoulas. 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.

www.hrnc.ca

Village of Point Edward Fined $75,000 After Worker Killed

Court Bulletin


12-16 For Immediate Release
March 6, 2012


Sarnia, ON – The Corporation of the Village of Point Edward was fined $75,000 today for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a worker was killed.

On January 30, 2010, members of the village’s paid volunteer fire department were participating in ice water rescue training. After doing swimming and floating exercises, the workers were instructed to swim out to a moving sheet of ice, climb it, and ride it down the lake. Some of them could not climb the ice floe and attempted to swim back to shore. One worker, unable to climb onto shore, was pushed by the ice floe under its surface. The worker was trapped under the ice floe for about four minutes. The worker was removed but died due to being trapped in the cold water.

A Ministry of Labour investigation determined that although there was rescue equipment in one of the fire trucks parked on shore during the exercise, there was no equipment readily available to pull the worker onto shore.

The Corporation of the Village of Point Edward pleaded guilty as an employer to failing to take the reasonable precaution of ensuring that adequate rescue equipment was available for the ice water rescue training exercise.

A related charge against an individual is still before the courts and is scheduled for a trial in May.
The fine was imposed by Justice Deborah Austin. 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.


www.hrnc.ca

Fatal accidents in the workplace.

Small Business HR

Fatal accidents - does anyone have the actual numbers with ages available?

My experience in the Niagara Region has been young workers and lack of training when working with machinery or around machinery. ex: Boom truck operator hits overhead power line and 18 year old killed by touching electrified truck; or Take Your Kid to Work Day at (John Deere-now closed) 14 year olds driving gator in yard (no training) hit the transport bed backing up to dock. Examples of deaths in the workplace - not injuries. They are still happening. I do not know the age of the electrician who was recently killed at the GM plant when crushed by a crane against pipes - probably still under investigation. What is happening? Workers are still dying on the job - not just loosing fingers in a saw! Am I the only one aware of this? Have the safety procedures been taught? They were not taught to the dead 18 year old and neither were they taught to the 14 year old. There have been many changes in safety procedures since two of these deaths. But an electrician still died - May he rest in peace and God be with his family.

Comment from LinkedIn Poll on Canadian HR Law

www.hrnc.ca-Company and Supervisor Fined $171,000 Total After Worker Injured

Company and Supervisor Fined $171,000 Total After Worker Injured

November 22, 2011

Windsor, ON - ThyssenKrupp Industrial Services Canada Inc., carrying on business as ThyssenKrupp Hearn Division, a provider of warehousing, packaging and transportation services, was fined $160,000 for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a worker was injured. Don Hearn Jr., a supervisor, was fined $11,000 in relation to the same incident. On February 25, 2009, a worker was doing electrical upgrades at the company's warehouse on Sprucewood Ave. in Windsor. As the worker was removing conductors from an electrical panel, a bare conductor touched the side of the electrical panel, causing an arc flash. The worker sustained serious electrical burns.
A Ministry of Labour investigation found that the electrical panel was not disconnected from the power source, locked out or tagged before the work started.
ThyssenKrupp Industrial Services Canada Inc., carrying on business as ThyssenKrupp Hearn Division, was found guilty of failing to ensure that the electrical panel was disconnected, locked out and tagged prior to work being done on it. Don Hearn Jr. was found guilty of the same.
The fines were imposed by Justice of the Peace Robert Gay. 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.