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

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

Proactive Employment Standards Inspections

Proactive may be another way of saying "without a complaint".  Ministry of Labour Officers often used to be reactive NOT proactive. For instance, if an employee made a complaint about an employer the MOL would come and investigate. The Chief Prevention Officer wants to change that. By hiring and training more officers; putting out more public warnings; using social media to repeat the warnings and make sure all those "unknown" employers comply.

If you are in business it is time to make it your business to find out what your employer obligations demand of you with regards to the understanding of your employees' rights and safety.

Ontario will help ensure fairness in the workplace by enhancing the enforcement of the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA) through proactive inspections. Each year, employment standards officers visit employers to ensure compliance with core ESA standards such as posting the ES poster, wage statements, unauthorized deductions, record keeping, hours of work, eating periods, overtime pay, minimum wage, public holidays, vacation with pay and in the case of temporary help agencies, providing required information to assignment employees and charging employees fees.

Inspections are also aimed at educating employers and employees about their rights and responsibilities under the ESA, and helping them to find more information. If violations are found during an inspection, officers may issue a range of compliance tools, including compliance orders, orders to pay wages/fees, or Part I Notices of Offence ("tickets"). In some cases, prosecution may be considered, and employers may also be re-inspected at a later date.

Chief Prevention Officer, George Gritziotis, wants complete compliance from all Ontario employers and businesses according to his talk to the CME-EAC last fall.

We are ALL responsible — employers, supervisors and workers — for preventing workplace illness and injury. Get involved now! Your search for workplace health and safety information starts right here…or here.

 

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

1648133 Ontario Ltd. and Employee Fined $156,000 After Worker Injured

November 15, 2012 2:30 pm    Ministry of Labour

 

Brampton, ON - 1648133 Ontario Ltd., operator of Furmar Dixie Road, a Mississauga facility that produces asphalt, was fined $150,000 for violations of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a worker was injured. An employee of the company, Colin Martin, was fined $6,000 in relation to the same incident.

On June 3, 2011, a truck driver arrived at Furmar Dixie Road to pick up six tons of asphalt. The driver asked about the pickup procedure at the main office and was told to drive under a silo and a horn would indicate when to load up. The driver stopped the truck after hearing the horn, believing that the truck was correctly lined up to receive the asphalt. There were no signals to indicate that the truck was in the wrong position, and the asphalt began releasing onto the cab of the truck, caving it in. The driver yelled for help, was pulled from the truck and suffered severe injuries.

1648133 Ontario Ltd. plead guilty to failing to ensure that the silo was guarded or shielded to prevent its asphalt from endangering a worker. The company also plead guilty to failing to provide the driver with adequate information, instruction and supervision regarding the asphalt loading process. It was fined $75,000 for each offence.

When Ministry of Labour personnel went to investigate the incident they tested the system of photo sensors intended to prevent the release of asphalt if a truck was not lined up correctly. The testing, done in the control tower, showed the sensors for one of the silos were not working. Mr. Martin, who was in the control tower with the ministry personnel, left the room, returned and asked that they test the silo again. This time it worked. When questioned, Mr. Martin told the inspector for the first time that there was a control box that would allow the sensors to be bypassed. He had turned off the sensor bypass to the silo without the inspector's knowledge or permission.

Colin Martin plead guilty to altering the scene without the inspector's permission to do so.
The fines were imposed by Justice of the Peace Michael Barnes. 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
                                    5 Ray Lawson Blvd.
                                    Brampton, ON

Judge:                         Justice of the Peace Michael Barnes

Date of Sentencing:     November 13, 2012

Defendants:                 1648133 Ontario Ltd.
                                    Colin Martin

Matter:                         Occupational Health and Safety

Convictions:                 Ontario Regulation 851, Section 26
                                    Occupational Health and Safety Act, Section 25(2)(a)
                                    Occupational Health and Safety Act, Section 51(2)

Crown Counsel:           Catherine Glaister

Director Jailed and Companies Fined After Failing to Pay Employees

News Release November 8, 2012 McGuinty Government Reaffirms Commitment to Protecting Workers The Ontario Court of Justice  has sentenced Steven Blondin, a director of six Ontario companies, to 90 days in jail for violations of the Employment Standards Act after failing to pay employees. Between March 2007 and October 2009, 61 employees from six companies, operated by Blondin filed claims with the Ministry of Labour for unpaid wages.  An investigation by the ministry found that wages were owed to all 61 employees.  Between February 2008 and April 2010, an employment standards officer issued 113 orders to the six companies and Blondin to pay over $125,000. None of the orders were paid. Blondin and each company pleaded guilty to failing to comply with the ministry's orders. In addition to the jail term and fines totaling   $280,000, Blondin and his companies were ordered to pay the wages owing to the employees along with a 25 per cent victim fine surcharge, as required by the Provincial Offences Act. Protecting workers on the job is part of the McGuinty government's continued commitment to ensuring all Ontarians are treated fairly, while creating jobs.

QUICK FACTS

• The six companies owned and operated by Blondin include Steven’s Inc. of Orangeville, Axcea International Inc. of Toronto, Automotive Containment Solutions Inc. of Concord, Automotive CSI Inc. of Richmond Hill, Automotive CSI – Alliston Inc., and Automotive CSI – Newmarket Inc.
• The sentences were imposed by Justice of the Peace Vladimir Bubrin in Toronto.
• 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 Ministry of Labour prosecutes persons, including corporations, for violations of the Employment Standards Act, 2000 and its regulations to ensure compliance.
• A victim fine surcharge is required under the Provincial Offences Act and contributes to a special provincial government fund to assist victims of crime.

Do you know what the IRS stands for in Ontario Occupational Health and Safety?

November 2, 2012

The Ontario Ministry of Labour has been prosecuting violations of the Occupational Health and Safety Act by employers, with hefty penalties and fines.

Most of these violations involve the employers omission in training their employees of certain hazards.  The Ontario Ministry of Labour has found a violation in the omission of training in certain workplace operations of machinery,  that none of the workers had received traffic control training and a traffic control plan was not in effect, that the employer failed to ensure that the work surface was kept free of slip and fall hazards, and there are many more.

We do not have accidents in Ontario workplaces.  If you remember the ads the Prevention division of the WSIB released a few years ago - it was scary stuff!  Horrible things happened to people in the workplace who did not follow the OHSA or whose employer did not train them in proper procedures.

Where does the employee fall in all of this?

Perhaps, it is a little like Scott Street in St. Catharines.  If you have ever had the privilege of driving down that street you will notice the many traffic stop signals that have been installed.  Let me mention here that except for major intersections; those are not preventive measures taken - they are completely reactive.  Each of those "extra" traffic signals  represents someone who was killed while crossing Scott Street.  Crossing without going to a nearby intersection.  Crossing in the middle of the street.  The reaction of the City because the public outcry for something to be done demanded an action.  The re-action was another traffic signal.  It was a horrible way to die for a young student and for an elderly grandmother.  I hope that these additional traffic signals prevent it from happening again.

In the workplace, Justice Ham instituted the Internal Responsibility System.  It was a reaction.  However, it was after a careful investigation into what happened in a terrible workplace "accident".

The triangle of responsibility that he designed puts the Province of Ontario at the top.  They pass legislation and regulations that are made to protect workers.

Then the first stop in the bottom of the triangle is the employer, who is legislated to take all measures to keep employees safe.

The next stop in the triangle is the employees who are in the workplace.  Essentially, the foundation of this structure is the relationship between the employer and the employees.  Each communicating to the other about any possible hazards that may be in the workplace.  Then each taking responsibility for taking all measures to make sure that the workplace is safe.

I feel like I am repeating myself.  Everyone is responsible to make sure the workplace is safe because the Province of Ontario does not have any accidents!

It is extremely difficult for the Justice in these cases to charge an employee who has been killed or injured.  The employer is found to be at fault.  Common sense tells us that often the employee should not have been doing what they were doing.  Still, the employer is at fault.

Even when an employee is rushing at the end of the day to finish on time, early, or if working on piece work - to make an extra few bucks for their family - when tragedy strikes; the employer is at fault.

The employer may have set up an accident by using a compensation method that doesn't allow employees to take their time on a more dangerous job.  The employer may have given a young worker a chance to have his first job even without experience and paired him with a more experienced worker who was taking chances.

However, regardless of the Internal Responsibility System that is in place in the Province of Ontario; the employer pays the penalty with his cash and the employee pays the penalty with his life.

When will we learn that employees also have a duty to mitigate the dangers in the workplace.  They also have a responsibility to use common sense on the job.  They also must give up the chance for the extra buck by slowing down and doing the job safely.

The OHSA is like Scott Street for me.  It is the reaction to many injuries in the workplace over the years.  A collection of decisions so that this will not happen again.  It is also a collection of common sense.  Use it or lose it!

The Province of Ontario is regulating workplaces to use common sense.  Employers must train their employees properly and to use common sense.

Employees must use common sense to come home from work each day - alive and in one piece.

It is our right in Ontario workplaces.

Other information links:
www.hrnc.ca
http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/hs/pubs/mining/syn_minirs_2.php

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

 

Royal Group, Inc. Fined $50,000 After Worker Injured

 

Is a wet floor really that bad?  Yes, when people can be hurt!

Doesn't the employee have a duty under the IRS?

Who is ultimately responsible?

October 30, 2012

Newmarket, ON - Royal Group, Inc., carrying on business as Royal Pipe Co., a Toronto pipe manufacturer, was fined $50,000 for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a worker was injured.

On July 2, 2011, a worker at the company's Woodbridge manufacturing facility was setting up one of the production lines. The worker slipped on a wet surface and fell onto a machine. The worker's arm was trapped and injured between the frame of the machine and one of its moving parts.

Royal Group, Inc., carrying on business as Royal Pipe Co., pleaded guilty to failing to ensure that the work surface was kept free of slip and fall hazards.

The fine was imposed by Justice of the Peace John MacDonald. 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
                                    465 Davis Dr.
                                    Newmarket, ON

Judge:                         Justice of the Peace John MacDonald

Date of Sentencing:    October 26, 2012

Defendants:                 Royal Group, Inc. carrying on business as Royal Pipe Co.
Matter:                        Occupational Health and Safety

Convictions:                Ontario Regulatio 851, Section 11(a)(ii)

Crown Counsel:          Shantanu Roy

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

Employer Fined $25,000 After Worker Killed

Barrie, ON - Mike Vallee, an employer who operated a demolition and salvage business, was fined $25,000 for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after one worker was killed and another was injured.

On June 25, 2010, workers employed by Mr. Vallee were at a demolition project at a private home in Oro-Medonte. The workers were removing a dilapidated mobile home from the property. They had removed the interior paneling and aluminum siding from the home when the roof suddenly collapsed on two workers inside the structure. One of the workers was killed and the other was seriously injured.

The mobile home was in damaged condition before demolition started. The structural integrity of the home was further diminished by the removal of its interior walls and exterior cladding during the demolition process.

Mike Vallee pleaded guilty, as an employer, to failing to ensure that the mobile home was demolished systematically from the highest to the lowest point.

The fine was imposed by Justice of the Peace Linda Debartolo. 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
                                    45 Cedar Pointe Dr.
                                    Barrie, ON

Judge:                         Justice of the Peace Linda Debartolo

Date of Sentencing:     October 5, 2012

Defendants:                 Mike Vallee

Matter:                         Occupational Health and Safety

Convictions:                 Ontario Regulation 213, Section 216(1)

Crown Counsel:           Grainne McGrath