Edmonton-based equipment dealer Finning Canada faces four counts for violations of Alberta’s occupational health and safety code in the wake of a worker’s death two years ago.

On July 8, 2008, a worker was killed on the job at Suncor Energy Inc’s Millennium mine site near Fort McMurray, when he and other Finning workers were moving a disabled hauling truck to the shop for repairs. The worker was run over by the vehicle and fatally injured, and two other workers also sustained minor injuries in the accident. One was treated on-site, while the other was taken to hospital in Grande Prairie, where he was treated and released.  A stop-work order was issued at the time, restricted to the immediate area around the site of the accident.

Finning released a statement on its website calling the worker’s death “truly a tragic incident – one that will forever impact Kevin’s family, all those who worked alongside him in the oil sands and our company as a whole.” The statement goes on to say that “at Finning, safety is a core value that influences everything we do. We remain committed to achieving and sustaining health and safety excellence in all of our business operations.”

The charges the company faces include;

• Failing as an employer to ensure, as far as it is reasonably practicable to do so, the health and safety of workers engaged in the work of that employer, as stipulated under section 2(1)(a)(i) of the provincial Occupational Health & Safety Act;
• Violation of sections 7(4) and 8(1) of the Act. Section 7(4) states that an employer must ensure that a hazard assessment is repeated at reasonably practicable intervals to prevent the development of unsafe and unhealthy working conditions.  Section 8(1) stipulates that an employer must involve affected workers in the hazard assessment and in the control or elimination of the hazards identified.
• Violation of section 15(1) of the Act, which demands that an employer must ensure that a worker is trained in the safe operation of the equipment the worker is required to operate.

The company is scheduled to first appear in Fort McMurray Provincial Court August 30 .

Saskatchewan roofing companies may face serious fines if they fail to implement safety procedures as provincial authorities continue a major crackdown on this growing industry.

Since April, eight roofing companies in the province have been fined for violating safety standards. Most of the fines are related to workers not wearing proper harnesses while on the job.

Saskatchewan Occupational Health and Safety has stepped up enforcement in the hopes that increased fines and scrutiny will serve as a warning to companies, and make them aware that they will be punished if they don’t make workers wear fall protection.

While most support the increase in enforcement, some actually side with the companies, who often feel challenged by keeping workers trained and certified, given the industry’s high employee turnover.  Occupational Health and Safety officials, however, note that a lack of resources is never a good excuse for lax safety.

Provincial officials would also like to make homeowners aware that, when using smaller roofing companies, they should check to be sure they’re covered through Workers Compensation. If a company is not carrying the proper insurance coveraged, the homeowner might be liable for any injury sustained by the worker.

Occupational Health and Safety intends to continue, and even step up inspections until all roofing companies comply with the rules.

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.

In the wake of a four-day inquest into the death of 65-year-old worker Ulderico Iannucci, who was killed three years ago in an accident at the Thomas Fuller construction site behind Parliament Hill in Ottawa, a six-member coroner’s jury has made six recommendations for safety measures to be used when operating a backhoe.

The accident happened on August 19, 2005, as Iannucci was using the rear bucket of the backhoe to compact trash. The machine suddenly engaged and crashed through a chain link fence before hitting a curb and careening toward a stone and wrought-iron retaining wall, on which several other workers had been sitting. Iannucci was standing and apparently trying to regain control of the machine at this point, when the front bucket and tires crashed through the stone wall, which sat atop a steep escarpment above the Ottawa River. The machine seemed to “stall” for a moment, as the rear wheels gained traction and sent the backhoe over the edge. Iannucci tried to escape from the backhoe’s rear window before it disappeared over the cliff, eventually landing on a public walkway below.

A forensic pathologist testified that the cause of Iannucci’s death was multiple traumas to the head and chest with a near separation of the brain and spinal cord. Most workers characterized Iannucci as a safe and conscientious worker, but while he was licensed to operate a boom truck, a supervisor noted that he did not have, nor was he required to have, a license to operate the backhoe.

Among the recommendations made by the coroner’s jury are; a requirement that backhoe operators be required to take a provincially certified operator course with an emphasis on safety procedures; a requirement that construction companies ensure all employees have the required certification to operate backhoes; that an emergency kill switch to disengage power be installed in all backhoes; that the seats of backhoes be put in a locked position and the operator’s seatbelt be fastened before the machine can move forward; and that the backhoe’s transmission must be in neutral before the boom can be operated.

The chief coroner of Ontario distributes the jury’s findings to people, agencies or ministries of government that may be able to implement them, but a coroner’s jury recommendations are not binding.

<!– /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:”Cambria Math”; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:”"; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:”Arial”,”sans-serif”; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;} p {mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”,”serif”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-size:10.0pt; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-ascii-font-family:Arial; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –>

Perhaps they should be.

According to a new report from the Massachusetts Toxic Use Reduction Institute (TURI), entitled “Asthma-Related Chemicals in Massachusetts,” more than 300 substances are known or suspected to cause or exacerbate asthma, and that “[m]uch of the evidence (for identifying these substances) comes from workers exposed in the workplace.”

Asthma is an increasingly common chronic lung disease that kills more than 500 Canadians annually. The most common symptoms include shortness of breath, chest pain or tightness, coughing and wheezing.

Based on the report’s findings, workers in a range of occupations may be exposed to ammonia, chlorine, formaldehyde, diesel exhaust or any of the other 300-plus chemicals identified in this report as causing asthma symptoms. Lab workers, woodworkers, construction workers, plumbers, farmers, painters, and those in industries that produce metals, plastics, electronics, rubber and textiles are just a few examples of workers who are at risk. Asthma-causing substances are also commonly found in most cleaning products, including those found in most workplaces and homes.

The Canadian Lung Association reports that three million Canadians are suffering from asthma, and 25% of them have symptoms that are triggered or made worse by exposure in the work environment. That means hundreds of thousands of workers are affected. In addition, they report that up to 15% of new asthma cases are caused by workplace exposures.

There needs to be greater effort on the part of workplaces to either eliminate these substances or minimize worker exposure to them. The TURI report identifies more than 300 different chemicals, and that information should be used to develop strategies for replacing substances with those less harmful, and to isolate those that can’t be replaced, in order to reduce exposure.

In Ontario, occupational health and safety law requires that employers take steps to protect workers from harmful substances, and it gives workers the right to know about hazardous substances through the Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS). The province’s new Toxics Reduction Act (TRA) may also prove useful in safeguarding workers and the public from harmful substances including those linked with asthma.

The Ontario Ministry of Environment (MOE) is currently working to develop regulations that effectively implement of the Toxics Reduction Act, and those regulations should be completed this fall. In the meantime, it would be a good idea for supervisors to read . Slated for completion in the fall of 2009, the content and enforcement of these regulations will help determine how effective the legislation will be.

For our part, the Workers Health & Safety Centre has developed information resources and training programs to help workers, joint committee members and others better understand how to identify and eliminate exposure to harmful chemicals including asthma-causing substances.

Supervisors should read the Massachusetts report, as well as the Toxics Reduction Act, and the WHSC asthma fact sheet, in order to prepare for the new regulations coming down the pike. TURI also a database of potential cleaning solution alternatives that could be helpful.

Asthma is an increasingly common disease, and workplaces will have to prepare to stem the tide very soon. It’d be best to prepare now for the changes that are coming.

When it comes to the workplace safety olympics, B.C. Place Stadium isn’t exactly a gold medal winner, based on their current record.

In just the first five and a half months of 2009, WorkSafeBC cited Vancouver’s Olympics stadium for workplace safety violations a whopping 66 times. According to inspection reports on the stadium, which was first opened in 1983 and will be the site of the 2010 Olympics’ Opening and Closing Ceremonies, the site is failing to perform to even the most basic standards of safety.

Reports have, at various times, deemed the operators of the air-supported roof as poorly trained; reported the lack of a fall protection plan for areas in which workers were not protected by permanent guardrails; reported that a sound and lighting truss hanging from the roof was unsafe; reported that there was no risk assessment done for workplace violence; and reported that there was no plan in place to protect first aid workers and cleaning staff from contact with blood or bodily fluids. There were also numerous complaints of inadequate safety training, especially for younger workers.

Among the reports of injury included a worker who had been overcome by epoxy fumes in January and the near-electrocution of another worker in March.

In an attempt to correct the problems before the Olympics, stadium operations and engineering supervisors were fired June 25. On July 7, control room workers who were doubling as security guards were told to choose between the jobs, transfer to another department, or opt for a lump-sum severance package.

If Vancouver is to have a first class Olympic experience, they should work harder to make sure those working the games are properly trained for the safety of everyone involved.

A Brampton kitchen manufacturer has been fined $75,000 for violating the Occupational Health & Safety Act (OHSA), in an incident that resulted in the death of a worker. In addition, two supervisors from a temporary help agency were each fined $10,000 for their involvement in the same incident.

In August 2006, two workers from temp agency Opportunity Labour Agency Services were told to enter a shipping container to cut banding around a stack of plywood. As one of the workers began to cut the bands, the bundle of plywood fell on him. Ironically, these workers had been assigned this work after the task had already been deemed unsafe by other supervisors.

Neff Kitchen Manufacturers Limited pleaded guilty to failing to ensure that the plywood could be removed without endangering the safety of any worker, which is covered under OHSA Industrial Regs., section 45(b)(ii). Two supervisors from Opportunity Labour Agency Services also pleaded guilty for failing to advise the workers of the potential or actual danger posed by this load. As noted, each one was fined $10,000, as well.

The fine was imposed by Justice of the Peace Karen Walker. In addition to the fine, the court imposed a 25% victim fine surcharge on the total, as required by the Provincial Offences Act. The surcharge is credited to a special provincial government fund to assist victims of crime.

The fines are definitely getting more serious. WorkSafeBC has smacked two companies with fines totaling $315,343.71, among the highest ever imposed, stemming from an incident resulting in the death of a crane operator, who was killed while working on the Canada Line.

The incident happened on Jan. 21, 2008. Andrew Slobodian, a 22-year-old crane operator, was using a small carry-deck crane, as part of an ironworker crew installing bike path components onto the Vancouver side of the North Arm Bridge. As he attempted to move a load from the front deck of the crane to the bike path below by swinging it over the bridge guide-way, the crane tipped over on its driver side. Slobodian attempted to exit the rear of the crane, but he was pinched between the crane and the guide-way’s wall and was killed instantly.

A WorkSafeBC investigation released in 2008 found that Slobodian had not been sufficiently trained for the job he was doing. They also found that load weights were not clearly presented and there was no effective system to measure operating radius. Ironworkers Local 97, Slobodian’s union, disagreed with the findings of inadequate training and supervision, suggesting it was just a tragic accident.

Slobodian’s employer, SNC-Lavalin Constructors (Pacific) Inc. & Rizzani de Eccher Inc., a joint venture doing business as RSL Joint Venture, received a penalty of $233,535, while the project’s prime contractor, SNC-Lavalin Constructors (Pacific) Inc., was hit with a penalty of $81,808.

According to WorkSafeBC, the criteria for a discretionary penalty — a fatality arising from a high-risk violation committed willfully or with reckless disregard — were met in this case, which allowed for a larger penalty. And the penalty wasn’t as high as it could have been. The maximum penalty amount for a violation is adjusted yearly, and is currently $519,000.

Quebec-based logistics services provider Katoen Natie Canada was fined $70,000 last week in the Ontario Court of Justice for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) after a worker was injured in an incident in Corunna. Ontario.

The incident in question occurred on June 21, 2007, at the company’s warehouse in Corunna. At that time, a forklift operator was using an electric reach truck to lift and pull cartons from storage racks. When the worker backed into a steel rack, the worker’s leg was broken when it became trapped between the truck and the racking.

A Ministry of Labour investigation found that the worker was a certified lift truck operator, but was not certified for the machinery involved in the incident. It was also determined that worker’s supervisor was not monitoring the worker at the time of the incident.

Katoen Natie Canada pleaded guilty under the OHSA, specifically Ontario Regulation 851, Section 51(2)(a), to failing, as an employer, to ensure the worker was competent to operate the lifting device or was accompanied by a competent person while operating the lifting device.

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

Everyone would agree that basic operation of heavy equipment should only be done by highly skilled operators who have a demonstrated ability to operate the equipment safely, not just for themselves, but for everyone they work with. Other workers should also be well trained in how to work around the heavy equipment operators, and how to stay clear. And everyone would agree that unsafe activities on and around the equipment can result in serious injury or death.

But what are some basic rules to follow? Often, training revolves around micromanaging specific situations, and we often forget the basic rules to follow when working on or around heavy equipment.

Just as even the greatest hitters in the game take batting practice before every game, sometimes, it’s essential to simply consider the most basic rules of the game.

1. As with any activity involving potentially dangerous equipment, good communication is an absolute necessity. Operators and ground-based workers should know where everyone is at all times. Everyone should wear highly visible vests, and all equipment should have a back up alarm system that can be easily heard by all workers in the area. And everyone, especially supervisors, should have access to communications equipment, such as two-way radios and/or cell phones.

2. All equipment should meet all government safety regulations with regard to rollover. That means the equipment should be designed to protect the operator should it tip over, and operators should be properly trained with regard to working on slopes or near open excavations.

3. All personnel working on or around such equipment shall at all times be wearing proper safety equipment, including hardhats, goggles, and hearing protection should noise conditions warrant.

4. Never jump on or off the equipment; operators should always use the three-point contact rule, meaning both feet and one hand or one foot and both hands, in contact with the ladder at all times.

5. Complete equipment service and maintenance in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations, or even more frequently, for even greater safety. Periodic safety inspections should be done regularly by qualified personnel, especially with regard to steering and brake systems, and all operators should inspect the equipment before every shift, and promptly report any irregularities in operation.

Because injury accidents involving heavy equipment have a higher probability of causing a fatality, it is critical to keep in mind all aspects of your company’s safety rules and procedures whether you work on or near such heavy equipment.

A life – including yours — could depend on it.