In addition to the fines, the company has agreed to fix all of the hazards identified by OSHA and work to enhance safety and health procedures for all of its employees.  Among the improvements the company agreed to include the installation of a full-time safety and health director, who will have full authority and responsibility to develop, implement, monitor, and enforce the requirements of the company’s safety and health program. They will also appoint a safety and health liaison for each supermarket department, and provide formal annual safety and health training for all employees on an annual basis, in addition to training for all new employees.

The company initially contested the OSHA’s citations to the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, which caused the Department of Labor’s regional solicitor’s office to respond by  filing a complaint with the Commission, requesting that the company correct hazards at all of its stores.

Michael Felsen, the DOL’s regional solicitor for New England,  praised the settlement; “DeMoulas has agreed to a comprehensive and responsible settlement that corrects past hazards and paves the way for improvements which, effectively implemented and maintained, will significantly minimize hazards and enhance workplace safety and health for employees throughout the company.”

In one case, Welded Tube of Canada Limited, a Concord steel manufacturer, was fined $120,000 for an accident that occurred on August 19, 2009, while a worker was helping to change over part of a mill used to shape steel sheets into tubes. As the worker stood near the back of the mill, a section of the mill was moved into place using a rack and pinion drive system. As it moved into place, the moving rack pinched the worker’s leg and broke it.

The subsequent Ministry of Labour investigation found that the area of the mill where the worker was standing was not guarded to prevent access to the pinch point between the moving rack and the frame of the mill.

Welded Tube of Canada Limited pleaded guilty to failing to ensure that the machinery was guarded to prevent access to its pinch point.

In a case decided a day earlier, Woodstock Auto Recyclers Ltd., a wrecking yard, was fined $60,000 for violations of the Act that arose from a November 16, 2010 accident in which three workers were injured.

In that incident, one worker was removing a gas tank from a car, but the gas tank had not been emptied, so gasoline spilled from the tank and was ignited by a nearby inspection lamp. The closest emergency exit was blocked, however, so the workers were forced to run to the other end of the building to escape, which caused them to suffer burns and smoke inhalation.

Woodstock Auto Recyclers Ltd. was fined $55,000 for failing to provide information, instruction and supervision to a worker for the safe removal of a gas tank, and another $5,000 for failing to ensure that emergency exits were free from obstructions.

In addition to the fines, in both cases the court also 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.

Early reports on the accident said that he fell into a shredder, but apparently that was not the case, as the only shredder at the plant had been out of operation for about a year. Though the Victoria police and coroner’s offices and WorkSafeBC were on-site collecting evidence almost immediately after the accident they have thus far kept the details to a minimum, and they asked the company to avoid revealing details about the incident to the public. The only thing police would confirm within the first few days was that there had been no evidence of foul play.

On the day of the accident, a spokeswoman for Steel Pacific, said: “The facts of the accident will come out with the police and WorkSafe’s involvement and the company’s co-operation. Our primary concern is reaching the family and making sure they get the news in the most sensitive manner.”

Grief counsellors were made available to all 25 workers at the plant, even though only six had been working in the plant on the day of the accident. Operations at the plant were suspended immediately. In addition, the company has instructed its four worksites on Vancouver Island to conduct a review of all safety procedures so as to prevent any other incidents.

The worker had been with the company for three years. The accident was the first at the site in more than 450 days, although the timing could have been better, since it took place just one week to the day after workers had paid respects to those who died on job sites in B.C.

More than a dozen workers were hurt and casino construction was held up for a week after the second floor collapsed early on Jan. 27, when a critical support beam separated from the steel frame for the structure’s second floor, just as they were pouring concrete. A subsequent investigation by OSHA inspectors found violations to be serious but not “willful,” which is OSHA’s worst classification. Its original citations and proposed fines were issued on April 9. The final citations are for failing to coordinate inspections and failure to support the structural steel.

In the end, Messer Construction of Bond Hill was fined $12,600; J&B Steel Erectors Inc. was fined $9,800; Pendleton Construction Group LLC  was fined $8,400; and Jostin Concrete Construction Inc. of was fined $5,900. The withdrawn citations and fines remove direct sanctions against two other contractors.

Work has resumed on the Horseshoe Casino Cincinnati, and construction is on schedule. The casino is expected to open in spring 2013.

According to OSHA records, an inspection of the Buffalo plant identified “several deficiencies” in the cheese plant’s process safety management program, which details requirements and procedures that employers must follow, in order to “proactively” address hazards related to the safe handling of hazardous chemicals. In this case, the chemical was anhydrous ammonia, which is used in the plant’s refrigeration system. Their investigation report noted a “lack of procedures and tests to maintain the ongoing mechanical integrity of process equipment, no written procedures to manage changes to the equipment, incomplete written operating procedures, and a failure to document that process equipment complies with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices.”

In a statement, OSHA inspectors noted that the requirements of the process safety management program “are designed to prevent a catastrophic incident, such as the uncontrolled release of highly hazardous chemicals, by having employers effectively evaluate, anticipate, address and prevent hazardous conditions associated with processes utilizing those chemicals. Full and effective adherence to the standard’s requirements is critical to guarding the safety and health of employees.” OSHA also noted that Sorrento Lactalis was previously cited for the same issues at an Idaho plant in the past.

In a statement, Sorrento Lactalis, which employs 520 people at the Buffalo plant, “denies and strenuously objects to OSHA’s allegation that there exists any imminent safety hazard at the Buffalo facility. … We look forward to working with OSHA to clarify and resolve these allegations in an expeditious manner.” The statement went on to state that the company was committed to the “safety and well-being of its employees” and to complying with federal and state laws in operating its business.

The company has scheduled an informal conference with OSHA about the citations for later this month.

In Ontario, new and young workers are four times more likely to be injured during the first month of work than at any time after, which makes proper training and preparation crucial.  According to statistics culled from the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board’s annual report, 34 young workers aged 15 to 24 died in work-related falls, motor vehicle and machinery incidents between 2006 and 2010.

The blitz will focus mainly on workers who are between 14-24 years of age; those workers over 24 who have been on the job for less than six months; new hires; current workers who have been assigned to new jobs; and student workers and apprentices.

The Ministry will attempt to identify and inspect those workplaces with a high incidence of lost-time injuries among new and young workers, as well as those with a history of non-compliance, and those who have not been inspected in the last four annual blitzes.

Ministry inspectors will focus on four key priorities in their workplace examinations:

• Orientation, training and supervision – They will make sure new and young workers are being given all necessary information before starting a job, and are receiving required supervision. They will pay special attention to the requirements involving the Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS), and their rights and obligations under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, including the right to refuse dangerous work.

• Internal Responsibility System – They will check that requirements for the workplace’s internal responsibility systems, such as the Joint Health and Safety Committee and/or safety representatives, are in compliance.

• Required Safety Measures – They will make sure all safety measures required by OH&S are in place, including; safe practices for handing potentially dangerous materials; proper machine usage; workspaces adequate to prevent ergonomic and musculoskeletal injuries; specific equipment such as guards on machinery, as appropriate; and the correct usage of fall protection and personal protective equipment.

• Minimum Age Requirements – They will check to make sure younger workers meet minimum age requirements for their jobs.

Since Safe At Work Ontario was launched in June 2008, the Ministry of Labour reports that their more than 400 health and safety inspectors conducted more than 160,000 proactive and 66,000 reactive field visits, issued more than 360,000 compliance orders and conducted 25 proactive inspection blitzes.

As things currently stand, a contractor may need to call up to 13 different numbers before a single excavation, in order to locate all utility lines near a dig site. If it passes, Bill 8 would establish the non-profit, industry-funded mandatory “Ontario One Call” call centre as the single point of contact for all underground utility location services in Ontario.

At a hearing for the bill, which was held in late April, it was noted that the current Ontario One Call system handled more than 700,000 locate requests in 2011 and sent out almost 2.7 million locate orders, which is already a huge number. But turning Bill 8 into a law making such calls mandatory would make everyone even safer. Already, all 50 states in the United States have a similar mandatory program, and they’ve seen damages reduced by as much as 70%.

MPP Bob Bailey introduced Bill 8, a Private Member’s Bill, to the legislature late last year. The bill was co-sponsored by MPP Paul Miller. On April 21, MPP Bailey held an impassioned press conference about the bill, and he and a large coalition of industry and labor groups have campaigned for the bill relentlessly.

The effort seems to be paying off. On Monday April 30th, Bill 8 passed a crucial step in the process, and was unanimously referred to the House for “Third Reading.” This means there is only one more step needed to make Bill 8 law, and make the Ontario One Call System mandatory, which could result in greater protection for Ontario’s underground infrastructure, and the saving of many lives.

The explosion occurred at about 9:30 pm on April 23 at the Lakeland Mills Ltd sawmill on the east end of St. George, and set the building on fire. The initial blast was so intense, a door at a forestry museum nearly a kilometre away was blown off its hinges.

According to reports, 24 workers were in the sawmill at the time of the explosion and 25 were working in the planer mill or on site.  Emergency crews from the RCMP, Prince George Fire Rescue and the British Columbia Ambulance Service arrived to find the mill so consumed by fire that it was called a total loss almost immediately.  Regional healthcare authority Northern Health, treated 24 patients after the explosion and fire. Workers lan Little, 43, and Glenn Francis Roche, 46, both died from severe burns two days after the fire.

Immediately after the blast, WorkSafeBC issued orders to sawmill employers throughout the province,  ordering them to conduct a full hazard identification, risk assessment and safety review with regard to combustible dust, including dust accumulation, and potential ignition sources. Upon completion of the process, all employers must then develop a combustible dust control program based on their assessment, The agency noted that, while it didn’t  have reasonable grounds to close sawmills immediately, it would not hesitate to do so if they determined such a step was necessary. They also promised to conduct follow-up inspections to insure compliance, and to complete them all no later than May 9.

The Lakeland Mills explosion and fire occurred just days after WorkSafeBC released Burns Lake sawmill, which had experienced a similar explosion and fire in January of this year. That fire also resulted in two worker fatalities and a number of injuries. In a press release, the agency noted the numerous similarities between the two explosions, including the obvious facts that both are sawmills, that dust was present in both, and that both mills were working with beetle-infested wood.

In the wake of the Lakeland Mills tragedy, there were numerous calls for the release of information about both fires, so WorkSafeBC released information about their investigation into the Burns Lake explosion, as well as inspection reports for the Lakeland Mills site dating back five years.

According to the GAO report, experts and agency officials blamed the snail-like pace of rule issuance on such factors as increased procedural requirements, shifting agency and governmental priorities, and a rigorous standard of judicial review.  What no one seemed able to explain, however, is why OSHA’s  8-year average for final rulemaking  is fifty percent longer than the Environmental Protection Agency’s record, twice as long as the Department of Transportation’s, and more than five time as long as rulemaking by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Predictably, many pounced on the information in the report, which can be accessed here.  Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA), who serves as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, declared, “The process for setting safety standards at OSHA is broken. Even when the evidence is undeniable that our workers are dying from workplace hazards, OSHA still takes an eternity to issue a new safety rule.  While reasonable safety rules are delayed to provide never-ending opportunities for stakeholder input, workers’ lives and livelihood are at risk.  It is simply unconscionable that workers must suffer while an OSHA rule is mired in bureaucracy.”

Rep. George Miller (D-CA) agreed. “OSHA’s ability to protect workers has been crippled by excessive red tape that needlessly leaves our nation’s workers at risk of getting sick, injured, or even killed on the job.Rather than adding more bureaucracy to the process, like some are proposing, Congress should be working to modernize worker protection laws so that safety officials can reasonably and effectively respond to workplace dangers with the urgency those dangers deserve.”

In addition to examining the problems that bog down the rulemaking process, the GAO did make some policy recommendations. They recommended that OSHA could issue emergency temporary standards for situations deemed urgent. The last time OSHA issued an emergency temporary standard was in 1983. Since then, OSHA has tended to focus its efforts on enforcement and education in cases where workers face urgent hazards.

The report also suggested that improved coordination with other agencies to leverage expertise would alleviate some of the rulemaking problems, and noted that some experts recommended a change in current law that would allow OSHA to revise outdated health standards, using industry consensus standards as support rather than having to analyze each hazard individually.

The report also recommended that OSHA and the National Institute For Occupational Safety & Health (NIOSH) collaborate more on research into occupational hazards, so that OSHA can more effectively leverage NIOSH expertise in determining the needs for new standards and developing them.

An outgrowth of the negotiations that led to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), NAOSH Week was first launched in June 1997. It actually represented an expansion of the Canadian Occupational Health and Safety Week (COHS), which Canadians had been observing since 1986.  Since its inception, NAOSH Week has enjoyed exponential growth, and is now considered one of the most important safety initiatives throughout North America. This year’s theme is: Safety & Health: A Commitment for Life! Making it Work.

NAOSH Week represents the hard work of a number of safety partners, including the various agencies responsible for workplace health and safety, as well as the Canadian Society of Safety Engineering, the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety (CCOHS), Human Resources and Social Development Canada’s (HRSDC) Labour Program, the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE), and Threads of Life.