Canadian Occupational Safety

8 Canadian Occupational Safety | www.cos-mag.com FINES & PENALTIES Employer fined for not reporting incident quickly Western Archrib recently pleaded guilty under section 2.7(1) of the Workplace Safety and Health Regulation to the charge of failing to notify the Manitoba Workplace Safety and Health branch immediately — and by the fastest means available — regarding a serious incident involving one of its workers. The employer was fined $10,075. A worker suffered a serious injury while using an oxygen acetylene cutting torch to cut the lid off of a 51-gallon metal barrel. The vapours entrapped in the barrel exploded as the barrel had not been properly purged of its flammable contents prior to the task being performed. Workplace Safety and Health was not notified until two days after the incident. With respect to factors which led up to the incident, the employer successfully displayed that it had done its due diligence in satisfying its legal requirements in evaluating and addressing the risks associated with the task. However, the employer did acknowledge that it did contravene legislation by not reporting the incident in a timely manner. Ottawa coffee shop company fined for failing to comply with orders After several visits by an inspector and a corporate name change, Gaia Java Coffee Company failed to comply with four inspector's orders under the Ontario Occu- pational Health and Safety Act. The company was convicted on all four counts and a fine of $15,000 per count was imposed for a total of $60,000. The court also imposed a 25-per-cent victim fine surcharge as required by the Provincial Offences Act. On March 26, 2016, in response to an incident, a ministry inspector visited the coffee shop at 1300 Main St., Stittsville, Ont., a suburb of Ottawa. The inspector issued 15 orders, and in April 2016, sent a package of small business tools and resources via email to one of the company's directors to assist with compliance. Through the inspector's follow-up visits in May, September, October and December 2016, the company had not fully complied. The company operating the coffee shop then changed to its name to Gaia Java Coffee Company but had the same directors. The inspector returned to the coffee shop to re-issue the outstanding orders against the new corporate defendant. The orders were required to be complied with by Jan. 20, 2017. The orders were not complied with by the inspector's final visit on April 24, 2017. They included requirements to: • post a copy of the employer's occupational health and safety policy in the workplace • conduct a workplace violence risk assessment • ensure that all workers and supervisors complete a basic occupa- tional health and safety awareness training program. As of April, the coffee shop is no longer operating. However, the defendant remains an active corporation. Car rental company to pay $172K for bursaries Driving Force, a vehicle sales, rental and leasing company, has been ordered to pay $172,500 for bursaries in light of a worker fatality. On July 11, 2014, a mechanic was underneath a vehicle removing a faulty transmission switch when the vehicle rolled, causing fatal injuries to the mechanic. The Driving Force pleaded guilty to section (2)(1)(a)(i) of Alberta's Occupational Health and Safety Act, failure to ensure the health and safety of a worker engaged in the work of that employer. The bursaries can be used for refresher training, a Heavy Equipment Technician program or courses on safety equipment at the following educational institutions: Southern Alberta Institute of Technol- ogy, Lethbridge College, Northern Alberta Institute of Technology, Red Deer College, Medicine Hat College or Olds College. The bursaries must be established no later than 18 months from the conviction date, which was March 27. When a school awards the bursaries during an awards ceremony, a representative from Driving Force is required to make a presentation at the ceremony that acknowl- edges the fatal incident and shares lessons learned from it. In addition, the company has been placed on two years of corporate proba- tion. One condition of the probation is that no later than one year from the conviction date, Driving Force employees must attend and complete the Intro- duction to Automotive Shop Safety course offered by the Alberta Motor Transport Association. Driving Force will have to provide the certificates of completion for the course to Alberta's OHS department no later than 18 months from the conviction date. The Government of Alberta also fined the Calgary-based business $1,150, inclusive of a 15-per-cent victim fine surcharge. Inadequate silica dust exposure control plan results in $310K fine Peace River Hydro Partners of Fort St. John, B.C. has been fined $310,339 by WorkSafeBC. The firm was building a drainage tunnel at a hydro dam construction project in the spring of last year. Work at the site involved bulk excavation, blasting and crushing of materials — all activities that generate large amounts of silica dust. WorkSafeBC inspected the site and determined that the firm's exposure con- trol plan was not up to date and did not include occupational exposure testing or effective dust suppression systems. Tunnelling operations had begun before samples of the tunnelled materials had been taken and analyzed. Subsequent sampling identified high levels of crystalline silica in the tunnelled material. In addition, the respirators workers were using provided insufficient protection for the level of occupational exposure, said WorkSafeBC. Following the inspection, Peace River Hydro Partners stopped the work in the tunnel so that the safety issues could be addressed and did not proceed until an acceptable safety plan was in place, said the company's spokesperson Megan Adams. "Since that time, Peace River Hydro Partners has developed an appropriate silica exposure control plan, which has been reviewed by WorkSafeBC, and a respiratory protective equipment program has been implemented," she said. "We are continuing to ensure we remain compliant with silica exposure guidelines and are reviewing our options to appeal the financial penalty." Ultimately, WorkSafeBC said the firm failed to ensure its exposure control plan met the requirements of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation, a high-risk violation. Want more? Check out the Convictions page at cos-mag.com/convictions.

• Cover