| |
These
are just some of the recent fines imposed for health &
safety violations within Canada:
Food Processing Company
Fined
$75,000 for Health and Safety Violation
March, 2006:
A large food processing company was fined $75,000 on March 23,
2006 for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act
that resulted in serious injuries to an employee.
On June 18, 2004, a worker was inspecting a pasta-shaper
machine when the worker's coverall sleeve got caught in a
moving bar, dragging the worker's arm into the bar. Just prior
to the incident, the worker had removed a guarding device from
the top of the pasta-shaper machine. The worker slipped while
standing on the top step of a platform near the machine. The
worker's arm came into contact with the bar after the arm fell
into the machine's hopper. The worker suffered broken ribs,
multiple fractures to the arm and jaw and the loss of several
teeth.
A Ministry of Labour investigation found the machine was
running when the worker inspected it. When the worker removed
the guarding device, the machine was supposed to have
automatically shut off, but failed to do so.
The company
pleaded guilty, as an employer, to failing to ensure a nip
hazard on the machine was equipped with, and guarded by, a
guard or other device to prevent access to the pinch point, as
required by Section 25 of the Regulations for Industrial
Establishments. This was contrary to Section 25(1)(c) of the
act.
[Santa Maria Foods Corporation, MOL
News Release, Mar. 23, 2006]
Cereal
Manufacturer Fined $50,000 for Health and Safety
Violation
March, 2006: A large cereal
manufacturing facility in London, Ontario, was fined $50,000
for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety
Act.
On June 28, 2005, the Ministry of
Labour attended the facility and
examined an airlock sample port on a rice silo. Its
purpose is to permit samples of rice to be taken for
laboratory analysis.
The airlock sampling port was
found to contain a moving part that was not
guarded by a guard or other device to prevent access to
the moving part, as required by section 24 of the
Regulations for Industrial Establishments. This was
contrary to section 24(1)(c) of the Act.
Since then, the company has
instituted a lock-out procedure that ensures the
machine is not able to function while samples of rice
are being taken from the airlock sample port.
[Kellogg Canada, MOL News
Release, Mar. 20, 2006]
Paint Manufacturer Fined $75,000
for Paint Mixer Accident
March, 2006: An Alberta paint
manufacturer was fined $75,000 in fines and penalties
under the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
The company pleaded guilty after an employee was
seriously injured when his arm got caught in a paint
mixer in March, 2003 at a manufacturing plant in
Edmonton.
The company was fined $5,000 and a $750 victim fine
surcharge. It was also ordered to pay $70,000 to a
health and safety organization.
[Cloverdale
Paint, ohscanada.com., Mar. 17, 2006]
Steel Manufacturer
Fined
$125,000 for Worker's Death
March, 2006:
A steel manufacturer based in Stratford, Ontario, was fined
$125,000 on March 6, 2006 for a violation of the Occupational
Health and Safety Act that resulted in the death of an
employee.
On August 23, 2001, a worker was helping to move a
partially-constructed
smoke box so it could be welded on another side when the
285-kilogram (628-pound) box fell onto the worker. At the time
of the incident the worker was on the ground pushing on the
bottom of the smoke box while a second worker was using a
forklift to lift the smoke box. The first worker was
attempting to tilt the smoke box onto the forklift's forks
but, rather than falling back, the smoke box fell forward. The
first worker was taken by ambulance to Stratford General
Hospital and died early the next morning.
Following a trial, the company was found guilty, as an
employer, of failing to ensure the smoke box was transported
so that it did not tip, collapse or fall, as required by
Section 45(b)(i) of the Regulations for Industrial
Establishments. This was contrary to Section 25(1)(c) of the
act.
In addition to the fine imposed by Justice of the Peace
Hoffman, 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.
[Chrima Iron Work Limited Corp.
MOL News Release, Mar. 6, 2006]
Wood Manufacturer
Fined $80,000 for Health and Safety Violation
Feb,
2006: A manufacturer of hardwood plywood and hardwood veneer,
with a mill that produces hardwood plywood in Rutherglen,
Ontario, was fined $80,000 on February 28, 2006 for a violation
of the Occupational Health and Safety Act that resulted in
serious finger injuries to an employee.
On July 31, 2003, a worker was placing strips of wood into a
splicer when the worker's hand was drawn into the machine by
the wood. The worker's fingertips came in contact with a pinch
point. The worker suffered crushing injuries to the fingers
and amputation of the tip of a middle finger.
A Ministry of Labour investigation found there was a
plexiglass guard in place to prevent a worker's hand from
coming in contact with the pinch point, but the guard had
become warped in several places due to heat generated by the
machine. As a result, there were gaps along the guard.
The company
pleaded guilty, as an employer, to failing to ensure an
in-running nip hazard, or any part of the splicer machine that
could endanger a worker's safety, was equipped with, and
guarded by, a guard or other device that would prevent access
to the machine's pinch point, as required by Section 25 of the
Regulations for Industrial Establishments. This was contrary
to Section 25(1)(c) of the act.
[Columbia Forest Products, MOL
News Release, Feb. 28, 2006]
Steel
Manufacturer Fined $313,000 for Health and Safety Violation
February, 2006: A
steel
manufacturer based in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, was fined $313,000 on
February 2, 2006
for a violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act that
resulted in the
death of an employee.
On April 26, 2004, an electrical worker was attempting to
visually trace
some wire that ran along a ceiling when the worker walked over
an opening to
an alloy addition chute
in the floor and fell about
35 feet into a pit below. The worker died as a result of
injuries sustained in the fall.
A Ministry of Labour investigation found the chute opening was
protected
on three sides. There was a guardrail on one side, a fixed
piece of equipment
on a second side and a wall on a third side. At the time of
the incident a
guardrail was also installed on a fourth side, but the gate
had been left in
an open position. The gate had been installed about 20 years
earlier as a
safety
precaution after another worker fell part way into the chute
and was
injured, but over time proper use of the gate became
inconsistent. Although
the gate was sometimes kept closed, it was left open for
periods of time.
The company
pleaded guilty, as an employer, to failing to ensure
there was a guardrail around the perimeter of the chute
opening, as required
by Section
13(1)(a) of the Regulations for
Industrial
Establishments. This was
contrary to Section 25(1)(c) of the act.
[Algoma Steel Inc., MOL
News Release, Feb. 2, 2006]
Steel
Processing Plant Fined $75,000 for Health and Safety Violation
Jan, 2006: A company that operates a
steel processing plant in Stoney Creek, Ontario, was fined
$75,000 on January 6, 2006 for a violation of the Occupational
Health and Safety Act that resulted in a serious foot injury
to an employee.
On July 21, 2004,
a worker was helping to remove used cutting heads and spacers
on a machine located on a slitter line when the worker's foot
got caught in a pinch point between a stationary component and
a moving component that contained a blade. The force of
movement resulted in amputation of the worker's right foot.
The component had been activated by a second worker to enable
the cutting heads to be removed. A Ministry of Labour
investigation found there was no lockout procedure to prevent
movement of the component when workers were on the machine
removing blades.
The company
pleaded guilty, as an employer, to failing to ensure a part of
the machine that could endanger a worker's safety was equipped
with, and guarded by, a guard or other device that prevented
access to the pinch point, as required by Section 25 of the
Regulations for Industrial Establishments. This was contrary
to Section 25(1)(a) of the act.
[Nova Steel Processing, MOL News
Release, Jan. 6, 2006]
Mining
Company Fined $45,350 for Spray Paint Accident
August, 2005: In Calgary,
Alberta, a mining equipment manufacturer was fined $45,350 after a worker
was engulfed in flames while he was spray painting the inside of a van.
The fine dates back to the incident which occurred on August 23, 2002.
The employee was spray
painting the inside of a van outside the company's welding shop. The paint vapours suddenly ignited and the worker was seriously burned. The source
of the ignition is still undetermined, but improper ventilation is
suspected.
The injured employee had
missed his WHMIS (Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System)
training due to scheduling conflicts.
[Clemro Western,
(1996) Limited, OHS Canada Magazine, July/August 2005]
To view news releases from the Ontario Ministry of Labour,
please visit
http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/news/
|
