MHR - Workplace Injury and Safety Midterm Notes PDF

WEEK 1: WORKPLACE INJURY IN THEORY AND PRACTICE Opening case - Lakeland Sawmill Explosion Incident 2012 ​ Explosion and fire in Prince George, BC April 2012 ​ The explosion kills 2 workers and injured 20+ others -> they were severely burned, injured, and some with missing fingers and cl...

WEEK 1: WORKPLACE INJURY IN THEORY AND PRACTICE Opening case - Lakeland Sawmill Explosion Incident 2012 ​ Explosion and fire in Prince George, BC April 2012 ​ The explosion kills 2 workers and injured 20+ others -> they were severely burned, injured, and some with missing fingers and clothes ​ Explosion Cause ○​ The sawmill processed large amounts of dry wood which turns into highly fine + combustible dust ○​ There were previous complaints to the ER about dust issues (by EEs) + 5 dust-related fires in the months prior to the explosion but did nothing to fix the issue ○​ An overheated fan shaft ignited in dust-laden hair ○​ Overheated fan shaft with dust-laden air -> caused explosion Occupational injuries and illnesses ​ Workplace injury: any form of ill health that arises due to employment (i.e. physical or mental injury or illness) ○​ Note that they’re not just acute physical injuries due to obvious physical causes ○​ TYPES OF INJURIES ​ Minor and temporary -> i.e. slight burn ​ Permanent -> i.e. amputation ​ Life threatening -> i.e. cancer ​ Acute (severe) -> i.e. laceration ​ Chronic (will take years to manifest themselves) -> i.e. silicosis ​ Occupational illness: an abnormal condition/disorder caused by exposure to environmental factors associated w/ employment Types of injuries/illnesses per compensation claims 1.​ Lost time injuries: workplace injury that causes a loss of time from work, i.e. 1 shift to multiple weeks 2.​ Medical aid injuries: seeing a medical professional due to work related illness + the doctor has an obligation by law to submit it to the WSIB who will be billed for your treatment 3.​ First aid injuries: not serious at the time, i.e. put a bandaid on it ​ Ontario: the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act (WSIA) is managed by the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) ​ Other provinces: the law is called Workers Compensation Act (WCA), managed by the Workers Compensation Board ​ Nation wide: Association of Workers’ Compensation Boards of Canada (AWCBC) What causes workplace injuries/illnesses ​ Workplace hazards: any source of potential injury/illness in a workplace ○​ TYPES OF HAZARDS ​ Physical: entail a transfer of energy that results in injury, i.e. box falling off a shelf and striking a worker ​ Ergonomic: occur as a result of the interaction of work design + the human body ​ Chemical: many cause harm to human tissue or interfere w/ normal physiological functioning, i.e. chemicals causing burns or hallucinations  ​ Biological: organisms or products of organisms that harm human health, i.e. bacteria, mold, fungi ​ Psycho-social: social environment/psychological factors that affect human health & safety ​ However, work-related hazards are not always obvious ​ ER has the obligations to assess & control all forms of hazards, even if they’re not foreseeable Injury causation 1.​ Proximate causes: event that’s immediately responsible for the injury (most visible/immediate cause) 2.​ Root causes: the underlying or “real” cause of an injury (caused the proximate cause to occur) ​ Example: a worker falls in the workplace ○​ Proximate cause is that the worker lost footing due to a wet surface ○​ Root cause is that an inadequately maintained hose leaked, causing the wet surface ​ In the real world, it’s less distinct than the proximate-and-root-cause model. There’s often a chain of causality that leads to an injury ○​ Root cause of inadequate hose maintenance could’ve been inadequate staffing levels, which was caused by the ER trying to minimize costs of production -> bc they were pressured to maximize profitability to retain investment in capitalist economies Historic development of OHS ​ Ancient Egypt -> stonemasons and potters experienced respiratory problems ​ Industrial revolution -> new industries and occupations resulted in new OHS related problems, i.e. brown lung disease (caused by excessive inhalation of dust) ​ Previous perspectives of risk and liability ○​ Volenti non fit injuria - “voluntary assumption of risk” ○​ Accident proneness - inherent likelihood to be involved in accidents Historic legislative development ​ Late 19th century: Ontario legislation established safety standards (machine guards) ​ Early 20th century: Canadian jurisdictions passed factory laws to regulate heating, lighting, ventilation, hygiene, fire safety, and accident reporting ​ Royal Commission on Relations of Capital & Labour in Canada (1889) ○​ Improving H&S by establishing standards and mandating regular inspections ○​ System for compensating victims of industrial accidents, regardless of fault ○​ Labour bureau to be created to oversee these activities ​ Royal Commission on the health and safety of Workers in Mines ○​ In 1974, the 3 principal rights of workers first articulated: 1.​ Right to know about hazards in the workplace 2.​ Right to refuse dangerous work without penalty 3.​ Right to participate in identifying + correcting H&S problems +​ JHSC - reps of the ER + EE that meet and discuss how to keep the workplace safe ​ WHMIS legislation was passed in 1988; revised in 2018 ​ Changes to the Criminal Code to allow for charges for some OH&S violations in 2004 ​ OH&S incorporates physical and mental health Considerations for OH&S ​ Economic - cost benefit analysis (shareholder’s interest) ​ Legal - due diligence (a defence to OHS charges)  ​ Moral/social - conscience, what the society can accept Cost benefit analysis of injuries ​ Since perfect safety is unattainable, ER adopts a cost-benefit approach to safety ○​ “Safety should only be improved when it costs less to prevent” ○​ I.e. only fix things when the injury costs more than injury prevention (benefits outweigh costs) ○​ This doesn’t suggest ERs wish to see their workers injured or don’t take it seriously ​ Risk of injury can be classified as ○​ Minimal ○​ Unavoidable ○​ Acceptable Cost benefit analysis justification ​ Every workplace activity involves some level of risk, and reducing risk is expensive ○​ Workers—who are most often injured or killed—see workplace risk differently ​ Workplace injury is not inevitable or uncontrollable; it results from ER decisions about production (how, what, when, and where goods/services are produced) ○​ ERs make these decisions to maximize profitability, shifting the cost of workplace injuries onto EEs ​ Workers understand that ER decisions regarding risk can lead to injury or death ​ The primary goal of health and safety measures is to reduce injury, disease, and death ​ Workplace injuries have broader societal costs—injured workers require medical treatment, lose income, and may even lose their homes ○​ Meanwhile, ERs continue to profit from dangerous working conditions ​ These economic consequences are secondary effects of employer choices that expose workers to risk + is a political choice by government by letting ERs do this OHS stakeholders ​ Government ○​ Legislation - OHSA, WSIA ○​ Federally for OHS - Canada labour Code II (Section 91 for federal companies + section 92 for provincial companies under the 1867 Constitution Act) ​ ERs - policies, safe equipment, supervision ​ Workers - work safely, use PPE, report defects ​ Organizational labour - JHSC, collective agreements that affect safety Barriers to OHS/accident prevention ​ ERs who value production over safety ​ ER who focus on safety only when they feel like they should (i.e. for upcoming safety inspections) ​ ER may be uninformed/lack confidence about safety concerns ​ The role of OHS professionals ​ Broad array of backgrounds suitable for OHS careers, i.e. industrial hygiene, occupational medicine ​ Safety certifications (CRSP) help firms identify individuals with relevant OHS training ​ Companies may delegate OHS responsibilities to HR generalist or contract out services to third parties ​ Canadian Registered Safety Professionals (CRSP) are recognized experts  ○​ Many organizations require individuals in the field to hold this designation ○​ CRSPs​have training in: hazard identification and analysis; incident severity evaluation; development and communication of hazard control policies WEEK 2: THE LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK OF INJURY PREVENTION AND COMPENSATION Opening case ​ Jayesh Prajapti (44) was killed in September 2012 while trying to stop a customer who left without paying a $112 gas bill ○​ Widow claimed ER required him to cover gas-and-dash losses, which led to him trying to stop the theft ​ Deborah Pommer was in a similar situation, had to pay a $65 gas bill or she would be fired ○​ Pommer quit + filed a complaint w/ the Ontario Labour Standards Branch ​ Despite docking pay for customer theft being illegal in Ontario, restaurants and gas stations still do it ○​ Why not require prepayment? -> ERs resist prepay laws, saying the technology required is too expensive + losing in-store business ​ Implications ○​ Workplace laws often go unenforced which limits EE protections ○​ Workers prioritize safety, while ERs prioritize profits Jurisdiction & legislation ​ Beginning in the 1970s, the federal + provincial + territorial governments enacted legislation that regulate OHS ​ The jurisdiction of powers under the Canadian constitution means Canada has 14 jurisdictions ○​ 10 provincial and 3 territorial, when it comes to H&S laws ​ Approximately 90% of workers and ERs in Ontario are subject to the Occupation Health and Safety Act – enforced by the Ministry of Labour ​ However, 10% of the workforce is covered by OHS provisions in the federal government’s Canada Labour Code II, which covers: ○​ EEs of the federal government ○​ Workers in interprovincial industries (banking, telecommunications, interprovincial transport, uranium mining) OHS and the law ​ Each jurisdiction has its own amalgam of acts, regulations, policies, and guidelines ○​ An Act (Legislation, Statue, Code): federal, provincial, or territorial law that sets out a broad framework around OHS in each jurisdiction ​ This legislation is passed by legislature that has the authority to regulate work in the jurisdiction ○​ A regulation: sets out how the general principles of the Act will be applied in specific circumstances ​ Authorized by the government cabinet + easier to change than an Act ​ Several regulations may flow from an Act, each addressing a different of the Act ○​ Guidelines and policies are more specific rules about OHS  ​ May or may not be legally enforceable, depending on what the act or regulation(s) of the jurisdiction permit ○​ Standards and Codes ​ Set standards that may affect the design of work + provide practical guidance on the implementation of OH&S practices ​ These standards and codes may be incorporated into OHS Acts/Regulations ​ There’s also codes/standards established by various non-governmental bodies ​ i.e. the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) and the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) ​ The exact arrangement within each jurisdiction differs ○​ Example: in Alberta, majority of the OHS rules are in the Occupational Health and Safety Code which is a Ministerial Order ○​ Ministerial Order: order that the Minister of Labour can amend without cabinet/legislature approval rather than a regulation (which requires cabinet approval to change) The scope of OHS legislation ​ All OH&S legislation include the following elements: ○​ An Act ○​ Powers of enforcement ○​ The right of workers to refuse and do unsafe work ○​ Protection of workers from reprisals ○​ Duties and responsibilities assigned to ERs and others (section 25) Internal responsibility system (IRS): system of shared responsibility over health and safety that is the basis for most Canadian OH&S legislation ​ Primary responsibility rests with workplace stakeholders, not government regulations ​ IRS assumes that workers + ER have a shared responsibility for workplace health & Safety ​ ER is obligated to ensure that workplace are as safe as reasonably practicable ○​ Meeting the reasonably practicable standard means taking precautions “that are not only possible but are also suitable or rational, given the particular situation” ​ ER is required to advise workers of hazards + require them to use mandated safety equipment ​ The decision by governments to give ERs the power to determine how to address workplace hazards’ bolsters broader management rights to control + direct work ​ The generally accepted test is that of due diligence Due diligence: taking reasonable precautions + steps to prevent injury, given the circumstances ​ It is assessed using a 3-part test (FPC) 1)​ Foreseeability: reasonable ERs are expected to know the hazards of their business ​ Injuries that arise from events that other industry operators might expect are foreseeable events 2)​ Preventability: reasonable ERs are expected to take steps to prevent injury ​ Normal steps: identifying hazards, preparing + enforcing working procedures, training, monitoring worker safety, and ensuring compliance w/ procedures ​ Injuries that arise bc an ER did not take these steps are preventable injuries 3)​ Control: reasonable ERs are expected to take actions on hazards they can control ​ Injuries that arise from such hazards suggest the ER failed to control these hazards General duties of employers ​ Take every reasonable precaution to ensure EE safety ​ Appoint a competent supervisor ​ Provide information in a medical emergency ​ Inform supervisors and workers of possible hazards ​ Post the OH&S Act in the workplace ​ Prepare and maintain H&S policy and review it annually ​ Prepare policies regarding workplace violence & harassment Duties and responsibilities of Supervisors ​ Supervisor: anyone who has charge of a workplace + authority over a worker ​ An OH&S may include a general duty provision for supervisors to ensure the H&S of workers under their supervision ​ Prescribed duties include: ○​ Ensuring workers comply w/ OH&S regulations, ensuring use of safety equipment/devices/clothing, and advising workers of possible hazards Duties and responsibilities of workers ​ Take reasonable precautions to ensure their own + others’ safety ​ Comply w/ OH&S Act, regulations, and policies ​ Properly use safety equipment provided ​ Report hazards to a supervisor, i.e. defective equipment ​ Report any contraventions of the act of regulations 3 workers safety rights 1.​ Right to know: Workers have a right to know about the hazards they face in their workplace. While many hazards are readily apparent, chemical and biological hazards may not be. The right to know has given rise to systems such as the Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System discussed below, which provides workers with information about hazards materials and their safe handling 2.​ Right to participate: Workers have the right to participate in workplace health and safety activities. Participation most often occurs through joint health and safety committees (JHSCs) but can be through other means. Box 2.2 discusses the effectiveness of JHSCs 3.​ Right to refuse: Workers have the right to refuse unsafe work. The right to refuse represents one of the few instances where workers can disobey their employer. A refusal requires employers to investigate and remedy unsafe work. However workers rarely use this Joint health and safety committees (JHSC) ​ JHSCs are an important mechanism by which workers exercise their right to participate in OHS matters ​ JHSCs comprise of ER + EE representatives who regularly meet to discuss H&S issues ○​ Logic: combining job-specific knowledge of workers w/ the broader perspective of managers to identify and resolve OHS issues ​ The legislative requirements for JHSCs vary by jurisdiction and organization size ○​ Unions may also negotiate mandatory JHSCs into their CA ​ Tasks JHSCs perform: conducting hazard assessments, providing education/training, investigating incidents ​ While JHSC can propose hazard mitigation strategies, OHS legislation empowers the ER to determine how to control such hazards  ○​ Shows how JHSCS are advisory committees vs. decision-making committees ​ JHSCs are more effective in larger/unionized workplaces ​ Mobilizing worker participation => increased effectiveness JHSC requirements - Ontario ​ 3 conditions that ER must meet to have a JHSC 1.​ If more than 20 EEs are regularly employed 2.​ If the Minister (MOL), in writing, ordered the company to set up a JHSC 3.​ If the workplace uses designated substance, i.e. asbestos, silica, mercury ​ ​ *Special provision to request JHSC for ERs w/ smaller # of EEs ​ Ontario – Ministry of Labour Inspection has powers under the act to issue Orders ​ Federal – Safety Officers (the Minister) issue Directives Work refusal ​ Every jurisdiction provides workers the right to refuse unsafe work without fear of reprisal ​ Can refuse work tasks if they have reasonable cause to believe the action would bring harm to themselves/others ​ Workers should follow established procedures to report a work refusal ​ Limits ○​ A worker doesn’t have the right to refuse unsafe work if: ​ The work is a normal condition of employment ​ The refusal places another person’s life in jeopardy ○​ Some jurisdictions specify certain professions in their legislation on limited rights to refuse ​ I.e. Ontario legislation identifies professions including police officers, firefighters, and healthcare workers Stop work provision ​ Some jurisdictions have provisions to stop work in dangerous circumstances ​ Ontario legislation describes dangerous circumstances as follows: ○​ A provision of the Act/Regulation is being contravened ○​ The contravention prevents a danger/hazard to a worker ○​ The danger/hazard is such that any delay in controlling it may seriously endanger a worker Types of work stoppages 1.​ Unilateral 2.​ Bilateral ​ If certified JHSC member has reason to believe that a dangerous circumstance exists while doing an inspection, they can ask a supervisor to investigate and ask for remedial actions ​ If circumstance still exists, they may direct the employer to stop work Workplace hazardous materials information systems (WHMIS) ​ WHMIS legislation (1988) promoted workers’ right to know about chemical hazards in the workplace using: ○​ Labels to alert the worker that a container contains a potentially hazardous product ○​ Material safety data sheets outlining a product’s potentially hazardous ingredient(s) and ○​ Safe handling procedures ○​ EE training  ​ Substantial changes made to WHMIS legislation ○​ Introduction of new classes of chemicals and new requirements for labels and Safety Data Sheets ​ WHMIS 2015 incorporates elements of the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) - An international standard for the classification and labelling of chemicals being adopted by countries around the world OHS liability under the Criminal Code ​ Bill C-45, sometimes called the Westray legislation ○​ Passed in 2003 and became law in 2004 ○​ This legislation added sections to the Criminal Code of Canada that make company executives more accountable when workers are killed or injured on the job as a result of management negligence ○​ This brings the notion of “corporate homicide” into the Canadian Criminal Code for the first time ​ This legislation makes a company responsible for: ○​ The actions of those who oversee day-to-day operations (i.e supervisors and mid-level managers) ○​ Managers (executive or operational) who intentionally commit, or have employees commit, crimes to benefit the organization ○​ Managers who do not take action when they become aware of offences being committed ○​ The actions of managers who demonstrate a criminal lack of care (i.e. criminal negligence) ​ Passing Bill C-45 into law meant the following additions to the Criminal Code: ​ Section 217.1: ​ Those in authority for workers have a responsibility to take reasonable steps to protect those workers from harm ​ Sections 22.1 and 22.2: ​ Corporations can be criminally liable for negligence and other offences ​ Section 219 (1) Everyone is criminally negligent who (a) in doing anything, or (b) in omitting to do anything that it is his to to do so, shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons ○​ There have been several convictions, including large fines and prison sentences, under this law