The Ontario government recently launched an eight-week health and safety awareness campaign designed to enlighten construction workers and their employers.

They unveiled the campaign at Algonquin College, at the site of the school’s  new construction trades building, which will open to about 2,500 construction trades students next year. The new campaign follows a 90-day safety enforcement blitz of more than 2,800 construction sites.

Even though the province’s lost-time injury rate among construction workers is one of the lowest in Canada, the 90-day blitz revealed numerous violations, including improper equipment use and poor supervisor and worker training. As a result, Ontario officials decided that it was time to emphasize the need for the entire construction industry to learn the importance of safety.

The campaign is being run in Canadian cities with the highest construction activity, including Ottawa.  It is sponsored by the Ministry of Labour, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board and the Infrastructure Health & Safety Coalition, and will feature newspaper advertising in the key ethnic languages spoken in the construction sector, and posters will appear on construction fences.  Tip sheets for workers will be available on the ministry’s website at www.ontario.ca/ConstructionSafety.

Another aspect of the campaign revolves around a hope that the public can become more involved in providing information to ministry officials. To that end, a toll free phone number (1-877-202-0008) has been established for the public to call in and report safety issues they see. If a follow-up visit deems a jobsite unsafe, the province can issue a stop-work order in the interests of safety.

A coroner’s inquest was held late last month, looking into the death of worker Roger Hill, who died from severe injuries after being trapped in a rock crusher. The inquest determined that the tragedy was at least partly caused by missing and ineffective safety mechanisms on the rock crusher.

The accident happened late in the afternoon of January 21, 2008 at a Ridgemount Quarries site in Fort Erie, Ontario owned by Walker Industries in Thorold, Ontario, which had a contract with the now-defunct Hard Rock Group of Companies (the worker’s employer) to set up a portable crushing plant at the site.

According to coroner’s counsel Graeme Leach, at about 4 pm on that day, a massive rotor weighing several tons – with outer bars capable of spinning at 100 miles per hour – stopped working. Hill and two co-workers each took turns trying to get the machine restarted. Unfortunately, the clutch re-engaged while Hill and a supervisor were still in the impactor chamber.

According to Leach, several safety violations contributed to the accident. Lockout and tagout procedures were not followed and the engine in the impactor chamber was left running.  Also, while Hard Rock Group safety procedures mandated that a “safety bar” be placed between the bars of the rotor to prevent spinning,  the company had “two impactors, but only one bar, so the bar would be shared between the two and the bar was off-site on the day of the incident.”

The crusher was also equipped with a limit switch, which had become inoperable. “If it had been working properly, it should have automatically killed the fuel to the engine. … The evidence in my mind was unclear if it had been broken and just never repaired or had been deliberately tampered with.”

As a result of the inquest, the coroner’s jury issued nine recommendations, including:

• That the Ministry of Labour (MOL), Infrastructure Health and Safety Association and provincial safe work organizations (SWOs) continue to work together to educate workers, supervisors and employers on the “extreme importance” of compliance with ‘lock and tag‘ procedures and maintaining and testing equipment safety features by referencing the potentially tragic consequences of failing to do so;
• That MOL and SWOs review the effectiveness of the Internal Responsibility System and undertake an mandatory audit of surface mining operations to ensure that senior employer representatives conduct routine and regular safety checks on employees at remote workplace locations (with the results reported to SWOs when safety deficiencies are discovered);
• That the MOL and Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities work together to develop a system to track what mandatory OH&S training workers have and alert workers, employers and the MOL “when workers have not completed mandatory training within the required time periods;”
• That the MOL continue conducting regular spot checks of all safety features of dangerous equipment and consider imposing an obligation on employers to periodically certify that safety features have been tested and are in good working order;
• That the MOL investigate the feasibility that where ‘lock and tag’ equipment is deficient or absent, an immediate stop work order be issued.
• That all surface mining workers be required to have core training and, if mandated, specialty training modules prior to workers being permitted to commence work on a surface mine;
• That the number of inspectors for surface mining be increased; and, consider the requirement for a minimum number of workers before an oh&s committee or designation of a safety representative is mandatory.

It’s been a pretty hot summer so far, and we’re not even halfway through, so perhaps this is would be a good time to remind you to take special precautions on scorching hot summer days, in order to keep your workers safe and productive.  The higher the temperature goes, the less comfortable workers feel, which makes them more prone to accidents and also causes them to slow down a bit. But just as importantly, excessive heat can be extremely dangerous, and building a culture of safety requires that you keep your workers as safe as possible.

If possible, try to reduce the demand on each worker by reducing  the level of physical exertion such as excessive lifting, climbing, or digging. If possible, try to use relief workers or assign extra workers.  Try to reschedule the most strenuous activities jobs for the cooler part of the day and reserve the hottest part of the day for routine maintenance and repair work.

For those workers who must work outside during the hot part of the day, they should wear light, very loose-fitting clothing, with long sleeves and long pants, in order to avoid serious UV damage from the sun.  For areas of the body that are still exposed, such as faces, hands and necks, be sure to have adequate supplies of good quality sunscreen on hand as well.

Make sure all outside workers are provided with plenty of water. And that should be water, as sugary drinks and drinks with caffeine actually cause faster dehydration. They should also be given plenty of breaks during which they can drink the water. It is far more beneficial to drink small amounts of water at frequent intervals than to drink a lot of water all at once. If the work is particularly strenuous and is performed in direct sunlight, try to provide a shady area or tent, where workers can sit down, drink some water and recharge.

If your workers are toiling away in an area with a combination of high temperature and high humidity,  be aware of the increased risk to such workers of heat stroke or heat exhaustion. In addition to workers who don’t take adequate breaks or drink enough water, pay close attention to workers who take certain medications, older workers or workers who are not in peak physical condition, as they are especially susceptible to complications from heat-related stress.

Some of the warning signs for heat-related illness include headaches, lightheadedness, confusion, irrational behavior, loss of consciousness, abnormally high body temperature and hot, dry skin.  When a worker starts to complain that he or she isn’t feeling well, you would do well to take the complain seriously and sit that worker down in the shade with a cup of water and let them recover.

Other potential risks to the health of workers toiling outdoors in summer aren’t necessarily heat-related. It might be a good idea to have workers regularly check for ticks, which sometimes carry Lyme Disease. Be sure to watch out for mosquitoes, which can carry West Nile Virus, and plants, such as poison oak and poison ivy, that can cause skin rashes and make it difficult to work.

The Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety (CCOHS) has created a new guide designed to introduce Canadians to the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS), to help prepare workplaces for anticipated changes, as the Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS) looks forward to adopting the GHS standards.

The purpose of GHS is create a universal set of rules for classifying hazards and the same format and content for labels and safety data sheets (SDS) to be adopted and used around the world. The new guide, entitled “WHMIS After GHS: Preparing for Change” will help organizations negotiate the anticipated changes, understand the new requirements and facilitate a successful transition to the global standard.

While the exact details of the changes won’t be known until the legislation is published in the Canada Gazette II, there is sufficient information available to encourage workplaces to begin preparation. The guide will:

• Provide an overview of the new Globally Harmonized System (GHS)
• Describe the changes to WHMIS that should be expected when GHS rules for classification, labelling, symbols/pictograms, and safety data sheets (SDSs) are adopted.
• Provide advice on steps that employers can take in order to transition successfully to WHMIS After adoption of GHS

A copy of  WHMIS After GHS: Preparing for Change can be purchased by clicking on the title.

A 90-day construction site safety blitz by the Ontario government that was conducted between January and April of this year uncovered a lot of problems, and the Ministry of Labour has promised to respond aggressively to the problems and will implement a host of new measures  to improve safety at construction sites.

The blitz revealed a construction industry rife with safety violations. Inspectors targeted high-risk companies and issued 784 stop work orders for fall-related hazards, 3,421 orders for fall-related hazards, 1,120 fall-related contraventions associated with stop work orders and 121 summonses for fall-related hazards.  More than half of the orders issued were for violations related to missing or improper use or maintenance of guardrails, scaffolds and fall protection systems, and close to 80% of summonses issued were to supervisors for a lack of adequate supervision. The level of non-compliance was so high, ministry officials have called the situation “unacceptable” and “simply inexcusable.”

The problems inspectors found ran the gamut, from worker training and records deficiencies, unsafe ladders, stairs and window cleaning. Most of the fall-related orders issued spanned the entire construction sector, from industrial and commercial to institutional and residential building projects.

Going forward, the province, which has already doubled its number of full-time inspectors to 430 since 2005, will increase enforcement, with inspectors targeting construction sub-sectors that demonstrate a higher rate of non-compliance and going after employers who repeatedly flout the law. In addition, the ministry will launch an awareness campaign urging people to report unsafe practices, and they have added a toll-free hotline for people to call if they spot what might be an unsafe labour practice in any Ontario workplace.

In addition, a panel has been set up to review worker safety in Ontario. Their recommendations are expected this fall.

The Ontario Ministry of Labour has issued a “Hazard Alert” regarding Class Frontal-Fixed Rail Ladder (FRL) Fall Protection Systems. This Hazard Alert, which can be found here, is intended to advise all workers and employers that these products may not provide adequate fall protection under certain conditions, specifically a backward fall.

A Class FRL Fall Protection System consists of a permanently installed metal rail anchoring system, and it is used with an automatic fall arresting device called a trolley.  Because the trolley travels freely on the rail, the worker is able to use both hands to climb up or down the ladder. If the worker slips as he climbs up or down the ladder, the device is supposed to lock, which should have the effect of limiting the worker’s fall.

Unfortunately, worker was recently injured after a fall of twenty metres from a ladder attached to a tower while using a Class FRL Fall Protection System. The Ministry of Labour has determined that the design of the Class FRL Fall Protection System used by that worker did not adequately address all potential fall conditions. Specifically, they found that, because leaning  back pulls the  trolley’s internal braking mechanism off the rail in order to allow the trolley to slide down the rail, the trolley may not lock, which might allow a worker to fall.

The Ministry has announced that new requirements designed to address current safety concerns are under development by the Technical Committee for Fall Protection Systems. Once new standards are available, all affected products will be tested for compliance with the new requirements. Until then, however, employers are being advised to take reasonable precautions to protect workers using  a Class FRL Fall Protection System,  including the use of additional and/or alternate fall protection or access systems, as appropriate.

Sepracor Canada Ltd has been arraigned in Windsor, Nova Scotia provincial court on  five charges stemming from the death of an employee in 2008, and will be required to enter a plea this coming September.

The charges stem from an incident that caused the death of worker Roland Daigle on Oct. 7, 2008, roughly 18 hours after the quality-control technician had been exposed to vapours from the chemical trimethylsilyl diazomomethane while conducting testing at his workstation at the Sepracor plant in Windsor.

Last month, the Department of Labour charged Sepracor with failure to ensure adequate personal protection equipment was in place in Daigle’s work area; failure to ensure that an adequate venting system was in place; failure to ensure the employee was instructed in the safe use and handling of hazardous chemicals; and failure to ensure that no person would disturb the scene of an accident after it occurred.

All of the above charges were brought under the province’s Occupational Health and Safety Act.

In October 2009 Sepracor, which is based in Massachusetts, was sold to a Japanese company, but it still operates the plant in Windsor, as well as plants in Ontario and New Jersey.

Members of Daigle’s family attended court for the arraignment. They were pleased that the charges were brought, and hope they will lead to improved safety procedures at labs across North America.

In a new article in an upcoming issue of the International Journal of Nanotechnology, Canadian engineers suggest that research is needed into the risks associated with the growing field of nanotechnology manufacture so that appropriate protective equipment can be developed relatively quickly.

Based on recent estimates from the U.S. National Science Foundation, the nanotechnology market could reach as much as $1 trillion by 2012, which could mean as many as 2 million workers will be involved in nano-related activities. It has already been shown that nanoparticles (microscopic particles measure in nonometres, which is one billionth of a metre; you can millions of them in one grain of sand) may affect biological activity at the cellular and molecular levels, although these effects have not been demonstrated to create health problems among workers yet. This is why there should be research.

Author Patricia Dolez of the Department of Mechanical Engineering, at the École de technologie supérieure, in Montréal and colleagues point out that skin is not impervious, and nanoparticles can seep into the body through it, which is why protective clothing and gloves are often as essential to the chemical industry as respirators. But it’s unknown whether or not standard protection against chemical risks is sufficient for workers handling nanomaterials.

The anticipated hazards associated with the huge range of substances falling under the general category of “nanomaterials” remain largely unknown, which may explain why current regulations and standards testing for protective clothing and equipment are almost devoid of references to nanomaterials specifically. The article suggests that it might be a good idea to develop adequate workplace protection sooner, BEFORE the industry grows, rather than later, when it may be too late.

For example, while some researchers feel that certified respirators offer an appropriate level of protection against nanoparticles, others aren’t so sure. There is a lot of uncertainty about the increased potential of an inadequate seal where the respirator meets the face. Because of the very small size of nanoparticles, this could be of great concern.

The study’s authors also suggest that the workers most likely to be exposed to nanomaterials will be those who work in cleaning, bagging and formulation activities, as well as surface functionalisation of nanoparticles. In English, it means those on the bottom of the food chain will continue to take the most risk. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

A supplier and mender of the rolls used in paper-making machines, Xerium Canada, Inc., was fined $60,000 on October 2, 2009, for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) after a worker was injured.

In an incident that occurred on March 19, 2008, workers at Xerium’s North Bay facility were attempting to repair a machine used to mix bonding liquid. The power to the machine was turned off and the protective guards covering the machine’s drive shaft were removed so that they could work. The workers again turned on the machine, but failed to replace the guards immediately. As a result, one of the workers caught his sleeve in the machine’s moving parts.

Xerium Canada Inc. pleaded guilty to failing to ensure that the machine’s driveshaft and gears were guarded to prevent access to their pinch points.

The $60,000 fine was imposed by Justice of the Peace Susan Hilton. In addition to the fine, the court imposed a 25% 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.

That’s $75,000 total off of the company’s bottom line, because workers forgot to do something deceptively simple that would have taken a few seconds, at most. Building a culture of safety, in which workers are trained to consider every detail before they even flip a switch, is worth every bit of the up-front investment your company puts forward.

Alberta Occupational Health & Safety has recognized nearly 700 companies across Alberta for their superior health and safety records.

The agency made the announcement last week, praising all of the companies for placing major emphasis on safety, and for integrating safety into all phases of their operations, even in rough economic times. One of the main benefits of such recognition is that all such companies can use the 2008 Best Safety Performer logo, and let prospective workers know that these companies put a premium on making sure workers get to go home after a hard day’s work.

According to OH&S, to be recognized as a best safety performer, employers are required to meet specific criteria, including a current certificate of recognition from the department’s injury-reduction education program. They must also be able to claim 60 consecutive person-years worked with no disabling injuries, have no outstanding compliance orders from OH&S, no violations of the Occupational Health and Safety Act in the previous two years and no work-related fatalities in the previous three years. In other words, it requires a clean safety record.

If 700 Alberta companies can manage a clean safety record, why can’t most of them?

These 700 companies will be able to attract the best of the best to their workplaces, and they will be able to point to their stellar reputation for safety in their promotional materials. Once again, we see a demonstration that safety doesn’t cost companies. In the long run, a safe workplace pays.