|
Samples of 2002 Prosecutions under
the Occupational & Safety Act and Regulation 213/91
ONTARIO MINISTRY OF LABOUR
CONSTRUCTION HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAM
A supervisor for a roofing contractor was convicted and fined
$400.00 for failing to ensure workers exposed to falling 3 meters or more were
protected as required by Sec. 26 of Ont. Reg. 213/91. The charge
resulted from a routine inspection.
An employer pleaded guilty and was fined $45,000.00 for failing
to ensure that the measures and procedures prescribed by Ontario Reg.
213/91 section 183 were carried out at the project in Jordan. A worker received
an electrical shock when a radial boom derrick came into contact
with an overhead power line rated at 4800 volts.
An employer pleaded guilty and was fined $5000.00 for failing to
ensure that the measures and procedures prescribed by Ontario Reg.
213/91 section 26.3 (2) were carried out on a project in St Catharines. A worker
fell 15.5’ through a floor opening were the covering was not secured or
properly supported.
A residential constructor was convicted and fined $45,000 for failing
to ensure that a second floor stair opening was guarded or covered as required
by Sec. 26 3 (1) of Ont. Reg. 213/91. The charge resulted from the
investigation of an incident where a worker sustained critical injury when he
fell through the opening.
A supervisor for a scaffold erecting company was convicted and
fined $500.00 for failing to ensure that workers engaged in the erection of a
scaffold and exposed to falling 3 meters or more were protected as required
by Sec. 26 of Ont. Reg. 213/91. The charge resulted from a routine inspection.
An electrical utility contractor was convicted and fined
$15,000.00 for failing to ensure that a minimum distance of 3 meters was
maintained between equipment and an overhead electrical conductor rated at 750
volts or more as required by Sec. 186 of Ont. Reg. 213/91. On July 21,
2000 the knuckle of a boom of a vehicle-mounted aerial device contacted an
overhead electrical conductor rated at 4,160 volts. The same employer was also
convicted and fined $45,000.00 for failing to provide instruction and training
as required by Sec. 25 (2) (a) as the result of an incident on March
26, 2001. In this case the same type of equipment contacted 4800 volts. The
charges resulted from the investigation of the events one of which caused
injury to a worker.
A contractor/employer was convicted and fined $10,000 plus 25%
surcharge for failing to ensure respiratory equipment as required by
Sec. 12 (1) of Ont. Reg. 838/90 and $10,000 plus 25% surcharge for failing to
provide the required training and instruction as required by Sec. 15 of
the same regulation. The charge resulted from a complaint investigation at a
high rise building renovation. The owner of the building and the constructor of
the project were convicted previously for contravention under the asbestos
regulations.
A structural steel erecting company was convicted and fined
$60,000.00 plus a 25% surcharge for failing to ensure that work was performed
from a scaffold in compliance with Sec. 125 of Ont. Reg. 213/91. The
charge resulted from the investigation of a fatal incident where a
worker fell.
The owner operator of a backhoe was convicted and fined $500.00
plus a 25% surcharge for failing to maintain a minimum distance of 3
meters between the equipment and an overhead electrical conductor rated at more
than 750 volts. The charge resulted from the investigation of an incident where
the boom of a backhoe contacted the overhead electrical line.
A supervisor for a constructor was convicted and fined $500.00
for failing to ensure a guardrail was installed at the second floor
doorway leading to a balcony before the balcony was installed. The charge
resulted from a routine inspection.
An Officer / Director for an excavation company was fined $50,000
resulting from two charges for failing to take all reasonable care to ensure the
company shored or sloped a trench in accordance to Ontario Reg. 213/91
section 234 and failing to ensure the company provided information,
instructions and supervision to a worker as per OHSA section 25(2). The charge
resulted from an investigation into the death of two workers when the
trench wall collapsed on them in the Township of Wellington.
An employer was fined a total of $20,000 resulting from three
charges for failing as an employer that the measures and procedures prescribed
are carried out in the workplace by ensuring that the fix support for
the fall protection used was capable of withstanding the loads applied in
accordance to Ontario Regulation 213/91 section 26.4 (2) and 26.7 (2) (5). The
two other charges were under OHSA section 25 (2)(a) and 25 (2) (h) to provide
instruction, training, supervision and to take every reasonable precaution in
the circumstance. The charges resulted from an investigation where a roofer was
critically injured when he fell 20’ from a roof when the fixed support he was
tied too gave way.
An employer was fined $220,000 for failing as an employer to
ensure that the measures and procedures as per Ontario Regulation 213/91
section 93 (2) (a) were carried out. A worker was also found guilty and
fined $7,500 for failing to work in compliance with the same regulation. The
charges resulted from an investigation where two workers were killed and two
were critically injured when the supporting cable for a crane’s boom failed
during a concrete pour at a project in Oakville.
Two supervisors were each issued a Part One Summons for failing
to ensure the workers worked in a manner and with the protective devices as
required as per OHSA section 27 (1) (a). A project supervisor and a
roofing supervisor on the same project in Brantford failed to ensure the
workers working along the roof perimeter wore fall protection as per Ontario
Regulation 213/91 section 26.1 (2). The distance they may have fallen was 18’.
Both supervisors were issued the maximum fine under a Part One Summons of $500.
A Constructor was fined $30,000 and an employer was fined $9,000
for failing to ensure that fall protection as per Ontario Regulation 213/91
section 26 was worn. The charges resulted from an investigation where a worker
fell approximately 20’ while installing sheathing on a roof for a residential
project in Hamilton.
A roofing supervisor in Brantford was issued a Part One Summons
and pleaded guilty for failing to ensure that his workers wore fall protection
as per Ontario Regulation 213/91 section 26.1 (2). The fine levied by the
courts was $500.
A worker was issued a Part One Summons and pleaded guilty for failing
to maintain the minimum distance of 3 metres as per Ontario Regulation
213/91 section 186 when he came into contact with an overhead power line rated
at 4800 volts with the raised box of the dump truck he was operating at a
project in Waterford. The worker was fined $500.
A supervisor was issued a Part One Summons and pleaded guilty
for failing to ensure that a worker is not present in a confined space prior to
ensuring that it is hazardous free as per Ontario Regulation 213/91
section 61 (1). The supervisor received a $500 fine.
An Employer pleaded guilty and fined $100,000 resulting in the death
of a worker for failing to take every reasonable precaution to prevent a hazard
to a worker from an energized electrical conductor in St. Catharines as
per Ontario regulation 213/91 section 182.
A supervisor for a residential project in Brantford was issued a
Part One Summons for failing to ensure that the walls of an excavation were
supported by a support system as per Ontario Regulation 213/91 section
234. The supervisor pleaded guilty and received a fine of $500.
A supervisor was issued a Part One Summons for failing to ensure
that a method of fall protection was worn on a project in Brantford as
per Ontario Regulation 213/91 section 26.1 (2). The supervisor pleaded guilty
and received a fined of $500.
A supervisor was issued a Part One Summons for failing to ensure
locates were carried out prior to excavating as per Ontario Regulation
213/91 section 228 (1)(a). A backhoe hit a 120-volt underground line pulling
the line from the distribution panel that cased a flash that resulted in
tripping a 4000-volt feeder breaker at a project in Simcoe. The supervisor
pleaded guilty a $450 fine was levied by the courts.
A worker pleaded guilty on a Part One summons for failing to
maintain the minimum distance as per Ontario Regulation 213/91 section
186 from an energized overhead electrical conductor. The worker, a boom truck
operator made contact to an overhead line rated at 16,000 volts. The incident
occurred on a residential project in Brantford and the worker received a $500
fine.
A roofing contractor in Cambridge pleaded guilty and received a
$60,000 fine for failing as an employer to ensure fall protection was worn
as per Ontario Regulation 213/91 section 26.1 (2). The charge stems from an
incident where a worker fell approximately 20 feet and broke his leg and ankle.
An excavating contractor pleaded guilty and fined $110,000 for
failing as an employer to ensure the measures and procedures prescribed by
Ontario Regulation 213/91 section 172 were carried out on the project. The
charge stems from a fatality in December 2000 on a project in the
Township of Wellesley. A worker in an excavation was preparing the granular
base for a catch-basin. During this time the precast catch-basin was being
hoisted to lower into the excavation. The slings used to support the catch-basin
failed, causing the catch-basin to drop and roll into the excavation
striking the worker.
Source: Ministry of Labour
Return to Top
|
