Issued: March 19, 2009

During an enforcement “blitz” of provincially regulated industrial workplaces in September 2008, Ontario Ministry of Labour inspectors checked for hazards that could cause workers to fall. Inspectors concentrated on transportation, wholesale, industrial services and wood and metal fabrication subsectors.

Workplace inspection “blitzes”
Workplace inspections by the Ministry are announced in advance, and results are posted on the Ministry’s website. During such blitzes, inspectors take a “zero tolerance” approach to contraventions of the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) and its regulations.

The blitzes are designed to raise awareness of known workplace hazards and compliance with safety regulations. The overall goal is to promote a long–lasting increase in compliance, and a decrease in the rate of injuries.

The ministry does not limit its inspections to workplaces with injuries; it also focuses on workplaces with higher risks of injuries by using predictive indicators such as inherent hazards and poor records of compliance with safety regulations.

Because many workplace injuries and fatalities can be traced to a few root causes in each sector, Ministry of Labour inspectors conduct proactive blitzes to raise awareness of — and increase compliance with — health and safety legislation and regulations in these critical areas.

Inspectors’ findings determine the level of engagement and frequency of subsequent inspections for individual workplaces. Ministry of Labour inspectors often refer employers to Health and Safety Associations (HSAs) for additional assistance and training.

Safe At Work Ontario
This focused enforcement is part of the province’s Safe At Work Ontario strategy, launched in June 2008 to improve enforcement of — and promote compliance with — the OHSA.

The focus is on improving workplace health and safety practices through education, training, and enforcement of provincial legislation and regulations through partnership with the system’s education and prevention partners such as:

• the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB), and
• workplace health and safety associations (HSAs).
  

The main concern of the Ministry of labour is to enforce compliance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act and its regulations.

The WSIB focuses on prevention.

The HSAs provide training and education.

Focus on preventing workers from falling
According to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB), falls have continued continue to comprise more than 17 per cent of claims for lost–time injuries in all provincially regulated workplaces (including industrial and other sectors) since at least 1997. The accompanying table shows data for calendar years 2002 to 2007.

Source: WSIB Statistical Supplement to the Annual Report 2007

Of all recent workplace fatalities in all provincially regulated industrial subsectors, 27 per cent have been caused by falls. (Click here for a complete list of “industrial” subsectors.)

How the blitz was conducted
Among the many criteria used by inspectors for selecting workplaces to check were the time that had elapsed since previous inspections and inspectors’ knowledge of specific workplace conditions with potential for causing workers to fall.

Outcomes of the blitz
During the blitz, inspectors across the province made 935 visits to workplaces. They issued 2,268 correction orders, of which 183 were stop work orders. (Stop work orders are issued only when workers are in imminent danger.)

Inspectors also issued 15 tickets to related to contraventions of the Occupational Health and Safety Act and its regulations.

Compliance analysis
Generally, the percentage of orders issued for falls blitz was fairly consistent with the percentage of orders issued for the program’s cross–sector hazard targeting, with a slightly raised profile on the sections dealing with fall prevention. The following analysis is based on the total orders issued during the blitz.

The number of orders issued by inspectors per workplace visit during the falls prevention blitz was more than one–and–a–half times the number of orders per visit issued by industrial program inspectors from April 1, 2006 to March 31, 2007. This indicates inspectors were finding contraventions of the legislation during the blitz more frequently than during conventional inspections.

Stop work orders – The ratio of stop work orders to all orders nearly tripled during the blitz, indicating that the program’s focus and inspectors’ targeting methods were exposing serious violations of workplace health and safety legislation.
Inspectors identified the retail sector as being relatively high risk: inspections of only 114 premises resulted in 347 orders, 15 of which were stop work orders.

Employer duties – The highest count of orders pertained to those issued to employers under the employer duties sections of the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA), Sections 25 and 26. These orders represented 27.3 per cent of all of the orders issued during the blitz. About a quarter of these were issued to the employer under Section 25 (2) (h), the general duty clause of the OHSA.

Internal Responsibility System – The next highest count was for Sections (health and safety representative) and Section 9 (Joint Health and Safety Committee) orders under the OHSA. These represented 11.4 per cent of the total number of orders issued during the blitz. This suggests that the Safe at Work Ontario focus on the Internal Responsibility System is appropriate.

Safe work surfaces – Orders pertaining to safe work surfaces under Section 11 of the regulations for industrial establishments represented approximately six per cent of the total number of orders issued during the blitz.

Guardrails – Guardrail related orders under the regulations for industrial establishments sections 13 and 14, represented approximately four per cent of the total number of orders issued during the blitz.

Material handling – Material handling orders issued under Section 45 of the Regulations for Industrial Establishments represented approximately three per cent of the total number of orders issued during the blitz showing the inspectors awareness that a high percentage of falls are related to the way in which workers are handling and moving various types of material in the workplace.

Ladders – Orders issued with respect to the ladder section 73 of the Regulations for Industrial Establishments represented approximately 2.5 per cent of the total orders issued during the Blitz. This would indicate the need to continue focussing on the condition and use of ladders in the workplace.

Fall protection – There were only four orders (0.2 per cent of the total number of orders during the blitz) issued under Section 85 the requirement under the regulation for industrial establishments for the provision of fall protection devices at heights over three metres. This indicates the difficulty of viewing some activities/contraventions in progress and confirms the merits of inspectors’ focus on the Internal Responsibility System.

Conclusion
The percentage of orders issued relating to contraventions known to put workers at risk of falling indicates that a strong preventive message on fall protection was delivered by inspectors during this blitz.

Nearly 40 per cent of all orders issued during the blitz were issued to employers under Sections 25 and 26 and Sections 8 and 9 of the OHSA. This indicates that the Internal Responsibility System generally requires strengthening in the workplaces visited.

The rate at which orders were issued during the blitz was one–and–a–half times that of orders issued by the Industrial Program as a whole (2.81 per workplace visit versus 1.62 – based on 2008 program activity).

Stop work orders were issued during the blitz at three times the normal rate per workplace visit. This shows that the targeting method and focus of the blitz were very accurate in terms of risk assessment for the workplaces visited.

Blitz results appear to show that the inspectorate provided an effective deterrent to contraventions of workplace safety regulations. The results tend to support the program’s ongoing and future focus on workplace fall protection.

Ontario Ministry of Labour inspectors checked specifically for electrical hazards during an enforcement “blitz” of provincially regulated industrial workplaces in November 2008.

Workplace inspection “blitzes”

Workplace inspections by the Ministry are announced in advance, and results are posted on the Ministry’s website. During such blitzes, inspectors take a “zero tolerance” approach to contraventions of the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) and its regulations.

The blitzes are designed to raise awareness of known workplace hazards and compliance with safety regulations. The overall goal is to promote a long–lasting increase in compliance, and a decrease in the rate of injuries.

The ministry does not limit its inspections to workplaces with injuries; it also focuses on workplaces with higher risks of injuries by using predictive indicators such as inherent hazards and poor records of compliance with safety regulations.

Because many workplace injuries and fatalities can be traced to a few root causes in each sector, Ministry of Labour inspectors conduct proactive blitzes to raise awareness of — and increase compliance with — health and safety legislation and regulations in these critical areas.

Inspectors’ findings determine the level of engagement and frequency of subsequent inspections for individual workplaces. Ministry of Labour inspectors often refer employers to Health and Safety Associations (HSAs) for additional assistance and training.

Safe At Work Ontario

This focused enforcement is part of the province’s Safe At Work Ontario strategy, launched in June 2008 to improve enforcement of — and promote compliance with — the OHSA.

The focus is on improving workplace health and safety practices through education, training, and enforcement of provincial legislation and regulations through partnership with the system’s education and prevention partners such as:

the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB), and
workplace health and safety associations (HSAs).
The main concern of the Ministry of labour is to enforce compliance with the OHSA and its regulations.

The WSIB focuses on prevention.

The HSAs provide training and education.

Electrical hazards in industrial workplaces

Electrical hazards have been identified in the Safe at Work Ontario strategy as one of the hazards requiring attention to reduce injuries and create safer workplaces.

Experience during the last decade suggests that technical knowledge of electrical hazards does not necessarily confer protection from electrocution. During that time, 26 per cent of electrocutions in the construction, industrial and mining sectors involved electricians, electrician apprentices and maintenance workers.

During the decade ending December 31, 2007, 69 industrial sector* workers electrocuted on the job, 263 others suffered critical injuries and 844 were involved in other incidents related to electrical shock. Total: 1,176.
(*excludes, mining, health care and construction sectors. Click here for list of “industrial” subsectors.)

For every electrocution, there are about 17 other injuries such as non–fatal shock and burns.

About half of the 1,176 electrical incidents causing injury were caused by working directly on energized electrical equipment. This includes 28 deaths and 255 serious burn injuries from arc–flash. Other causes of injury include malfunction of a multi–meter (often caused by using volt⁄ohm meters without fused leads), working close to live equipment (for example, moving an aluminum ladder against electrical wires), and faulty equipment.

Repair and maintenance are the most prevalent type of work when a worker is electrocuted, such as live work on 347–volt lighting systems. Regulations permit work on live electrical equipment only in very limited circumstances where it is not practical to do the work any other way. In all other circumstances, the power supply must be disconnected, locked out of service, and tagged before any work is done. Written procedures must be established.

Twenty–one per cent of the fatalities from electrical hazards in the last 10 years have been workers in the electrical trade such as electricians and line workers. However, 79 per cent of occupational deaths have been workers in other occupations including maintenance, millwright, apprentice, labourer, operator, supervisor, driver and heating, ventilation and air conditioning technician. Nearly all industrial subsectors have recorded electrical injuries over the last 10 years.

How the blitz was conducted

Electrical incidents are fairly evenly distributed among all the industrial sectors. Firms from many industrial subsectors were selected for inspection. Most had already been identified because of previous problems, including repeated infractions. Inspectors also visited other workplaces known to have electrical hazards but not necessarily having experienced injuries related to them.

Outcomes of the blitz

During the blitz, Ministry of Labour industrial inspectors in all MOL regions made 822 visits to workplaces and issued 2,149 orders related to electrical issues; 86 of these were stop–work orders.

The number of orders issued per workplace visit during the electrical blitz was more than one–and–a–half times the average rate for the Industrial Program between April 1, 2007, and March 31, 2008).

The number of stop worker orders issued during the blitz was slightly below the normal rate per field visit. This reflects the difficulty of viewing electrical repair, maintenance and installation in progress; such activity is not normally routine in industrial workplaces. Stop work orders are issued only when workers are in imminent danger.

Inspectors identified the wood and metal fabrication sector as presenting a higher than normal risk in the industrial sector. Visits to only 167 premises resulted in the issuing of 593 orders, 17 of which were stop–work orders.

Compliance analysis

Electrical hazards — The percentage of orders issued for contraventions related to electrical hazards and especially those related to the three main themes indicates a strong focus on electrical hazard protection was delivered by the inspectorate during this blitz.

Internal responsibility system — Nearly 40 per cent of all orders issued during the blitz were issued to employers under Section 25 and Sections 8 and 9 of the OHSA. This suggests that the Internal Responsibility System generally requires strengthening in the workplaces visited.

Increased rate of orders during blitz — The number of orders issued during the blitz was just over 50 per cent higher than the rate of orders that were issued by the Industrial Program in 2008 as a whole (2.61 per workplace visit versus 1.62 per workplace visit).

Stop7–work orders — The number of stop–work orders issued during the blitz was slightly below the normal rate per workplace visit; this reflects the difficulties of viewing electrical repair maintenance and installation in progress.

Effective deterrent — The results of the blitz suggest that inspectors provided an effective incentive for employers to follow OHSA regulations. The results support the program’s ongoing focus on, and low tolerance for, the presence of electrical hazards in the workplace.

Good policies and procedures — Industrial workplaces visited during the blitz appeared generally to have good policies and procedures related to electrical hazards.

Tracking electrical injuries — Because of the occasional (not routine) nature of electrical work at most industrial workplaces, inspectors experienced difficulty in finding electrical work during routine visits. The ministry is considering tracking electrical hazards statistically to assess the efficacy of inspection blitzes in reducing the frequency and severity of electrical injuries.

Working on live electrical equipment — Ministry data suggest that limiting work with live systems is the single most important precaution for preventing electrical injuries.

Conclusions

Despite the difficulty in observing electrical work in industrial establishments (such work is not usually a routine activity), orders pertaining to the electrical sections of the Regulations for Industrial Establishments comprised about 13 per cent of all correction orders:

“Don’t work live” — OHSA Section 42 – 18 orders
Written electrical lockout procedures — OHSA Section 42(7) – 45 orders
Worker protection from shock and burn — OHSA Section 42.1(2) – 20 orders
Of all the orders pertaining to all sections of the regulations (i.e., electrical and all other sections) issued to employers during the blitz, 27.3 per cent were issued under Section 25 (employer duty) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act. Of these, nearly half were issued under Section 25(2) (h), the OHSA general duty clause (“… an employer shall take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances for the protection of a worker”).

Eight–and–a–half per cent of orders issued during the blitz were for violations of OHSA Section 8 (health and safety representative) and OHSA Section 9 (Joint Health and Safety Committee). This finding confirms the need for Safe At Work Ontario’s strategic focus on the Internal Responsibility System.