By Rosalind H. Cooper

Occupational health and safety legislation in most Canadian provinces prohibits reprisal by an employer against an employee who makes allegations of unsafe work. Workers routinely try to rely on such reprisal provisions to attack any actions of their employers.

A recent Ontario Labour Relations Board decision, Petro v. The Beer Store, confirms that workers can’t. Reprisal complaints must relate to health and safety matters. They can’t relate to failures to follow corporate reporting procedures or to threats of discipline for refusal to follow directions regarding workplace reporting protocols.

read more…

by Rosalind H. Cooper

It is commonplace for companies and supervisors across Canada to be charged and convicted with respect to health and safety offenses. But the same doesn’t necessarily hold true for health and safety managers. In R. v. Della Valle, the Provincial Court of Nova Scotia recently convicted and fined a health and safety manager. This individual is now the second health and safety manager to be convicted of an occupational health and safety offense.

Facts
James Edward Della Valle was the occupational health and safety coordinator of the Cape Breton Island Housing Authority, which owns and maintains several housing units.  After concerns were raised by an employee, testing was done on vermiculite insulation found in the attics of some of the housing units.

read more…

By Rosalind Cooper

Recently, courts across Canada seem to be expanding the application and coverage of occupational health and safety legislation, providing broad and liberal interpretations of legislation. But that may be changing. The decision in Ontario (Ministry of Labour) v. Sheehan’s Truck Centre Inc. is being welcomed by many as an indication that the protective purpose of the regulatory scheme cannot override the actual words used in the legislation.

Employee run over
A company that owned and operated a highway tractor-truck sales business offered units for sale in its parking lot. While the company was expanding the parking lot, four employees were directed to move a number of the trucks in the parking lot from one area to another. The movement was required to facilitate paving work relating to the expansion.

read more…

By Rosalind Cooper

Which party on a construction project is the “constructor”? While some provinces in Canada use this term, other provinces use slightly different terms, such as prime contractor. All are meant to refer to the party at the workplace that has overall responsibility for health and safety on the construction project. It’s generally that party that’s exposed to the greatest legal liability in terms of safety-related incidents.

“Constructor” obligations
For example, under the Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA), constructors have significant obligations. They must ensure that all employers and workers on the project comply with OHSA and the Construction Regulations. The case law has confirmed that constructors will be held to a high standard in meeting those obligations. Therefore many companies go to great lengths to avoid assuming this role on a project.

An Ontario court has recently provided some further guidance on what indicators will be looked at in determining who is a constructor. In the case of R. v. Reid & DeLeye Contractors Ltd., a company was found to be a “constructor,” rather than the construction manager it had contracted to be.

Background
In June of 2005, Reid & DeLeye contracted with a hotel owner to construct a new hotel in Cambridge, Ontario. Reid & DeLeye intended to be the construction manager. The company was responsible for carrying out specific roles during the pre-construction, construction, and post-construction phases of the project.

read more…

By Julia Kennedy

Employers may now need to report all serious accidents that take place on their premises — even if no worker is involved or harmed.

Workplace health and safety laws have long been in force in all Canadian provinces to protect workers from hazardous situations and environments. These laws require employers to take measures to protect their employees from injury and to report injuries or deaths. Until recently, it was commonly understood that employers were not required to report incidents in which no worker was involved.

read more…

By Ralph Nero and Keri Bennett

Employers in Canada have typically understood employees and independent contractors to fall into distinct legal categories. However, recent court and labor board decisions indicate that the traditional definition of “employee” continues to expand.

read more…

By Jennifer Shepherd and Katie Clayton

Do you have employees working alone? If so, you may be required to assess your workplace and take measures to reduce risks of possible harm to workers. Indeed, many Canadian provinces require such action. A recent Alberta case demonstrates the tragic outcome that can befall a worker if you fail to conduct a hazard assessment, as well as the significant monetary and criminal penalties your company may face as a result.

read more…

By Rosalind Cooper

For years employers across Canada have struggled with the difference between independent contractors and employees. Individuals believed to be independent contractors are often classified as employees after their relationship ends, leading to liability for employment-related severance and other amounts.

The courts, human rights tribunals, and other administrative tribunals are constantly grappling with this issue. Most recently, the Ontario Court of Appeal had to consider the decision in the context of whether independent contractor truck drivers were workers within the meaning of the Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA).

read more…

By Ida Martin and Brian Smeenk

The City of Mississauga was recently embarrassed by a video of two of its employees duct-taped together. They were squirming around on a table, taped by their hands, torsos, and feet. This was apparently a routine employee hazing. It was leaked to the media by an employee who had had enough. The case provides a good lesson in how employers should not handle such situations.

read more…

By Patrick Gannon

The G20 Summit of world leaders will be in Toronto June 26-27. The summit is expected to draw considerable attention and thousands of protesters from around the world. Like the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics, there will be intensive security measures and lots of potential disruptions.

As the summit will be held at a convention center in the downtown core, it gives rise to many issues for downtown employers. And employers outside the downtown area will be affected too, given that the central hub for commuter trains is in the highest security zone. What can employers expect and how should they respond when faced with this kind of massive, high-security event in their neighborhood? read more…