Ontario Ministry of Labour inspectors checked specifically for unsafe work practices in demolition and renovation during an enforcement “blitz” of provincially regulated construction workplaces in August 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 Occupational Health and Safety Act and its regulations.

The WSIB focuses on prevention.

The HSAs provide training and education.

Unsafe work practices in demolition and renovation work

Hazards encountered by construction–sector workers on renovation and demolition projects have been identified in the Safe at Work Ontario strategy as one of the hazards requiring attention to reduce injuries and create safer workplaces.

All trades may be affected by the hazards associated with demolition work, particularly health hazards due to hazardous physical agents and chemical substances. Harmful substances that workers may be exposed to include asbestos, lead and other designated substances and hazardous chemical materials.

According to the WSIB, the insurance rate group that includes demolition workers has the highest rate of lost–time injuries (LTIs) in the construction sector and one of the highest average costs per LTI. Accidents are frequent in this group.

Figures are derived from WSIB annual reports. Full–time equivalents are a calculated value based on weighting of the average wage and WSIB premiums.

How the blitz was conducted

This blitz focused both the safety and health hazards associated with the renovation and demolition sectors. Hazards associated with this type of work, include:

chemical hazards
biological hazards
ergonomic issues, and
falls.
Inspectors had access to the Ministry of Environment’s web–based data bank of “brownfield” (contaminated former industrial sites) locations.

Ministry of Labour hygienists and ergonomists assisted inspectors in their investigations.

The employment of semi–skilled or untrained workers (including students) is prevalent in demolition and renovation work. The blitz afforded an opportunity to reach these vulnerable workers.

Renovation work on schools routinely takes place during the summer; the August timing of the blitz ensured inspectors had many projects to check.

Projects were selected from “Notice of Projects” submitted from across all sectors of construction, including:

building and structure (e.g., bridges) demolition or renovation work
interior and exterior work on high–rise buildings (balcony repair, brick pointing and replacement)
industrial building renovation
hospital and school renovations, and
home renovations.
During the blitz, 82 of the ministry’s construction–sector inspectors paid 333 visits to 288 projects involving renovation and⁄or demolition.

Outcomes of the blitz

Of the 809 orders issued during the blitz to correct deficiencies, 62 (seven per cent) were stop–work orders. Stop work orders were issued at a slightly less frequent rate than the general average of the construction program.

Seventy–four orders were issued for personal protective equipment to be worn (including respiratory protection).

At the projects, inspectors also issued five summonses and eight tickets under the Part I of the Provincial Offences Act.

Compliance analysis

Fall protection – Orders pertaining to fall protection were issued at a lower rate than for routine inspections: these 68 orders accounted for eight per cent of all orders issued during the blitz. This lower rate may reflect conditions in the particular sectors in construction that inspectors visited during the blitz.

Notice of Project – Thirty orders were issued to constructors for failing to file a Notice of Project with the ministry.

Ten per cent of the projects visited were found by field staff during their daily activities (as opposed to searching through “notices of projects”). This indicates a substantial &ldunderground economy.”

Survey of designated substances – Eleven orders were issued to owners of projects for failing to provide a survey of designated substances to the constructor. Orders were also issued to have the workplaces tested for the presence of “designated” substances.

General duty to protect workers – The highest order count was for orders issued under the general duty sections of the OHSA, Sections 23, 25, 27 and 28. These orders represented 15 per cent (121) of all of the orders issued during the blitz.

At least 28 per cent (34) of these orders were issued to the constructor of the project under Section 23(1)(b), which the ministry requires to be issued when an inspector issues orders to sub–trades.

Internal Responsibility System – Of the 288 projects visited, 14 projects had orders issued for either having to select a health and safety representative or to cause a joint health and safety committee to be formed; Section 8 and section 9 of the OHSA respectively. The low number of Internal Responsibility Sytsem–related orders may be a reflection that the health and safety representatives or the committees are already in place on the majority of the projects. It could also be a reflection of the number of projects employing fewer than five workers (where requirements are less rigorous). Only three orders were issued to employers for not having health and safety policies.

Housekeeping – The housekeeping sections of the construction regulation regarding clean up of rubbish and debris, protecting rebar and maintaining a clear work area and a clear route to the work area accounted for 25 of the orders issued during the blitz.

Fall protection – Falls are the leading cause of fatalities and injuries in construction workplaces. Orders for fall protection under OHSA sections 26 to 26.9, which cover guardrails, coverings for openings in work surfaces and the use of personal fall protection equipment, accounted for 8.4 per cent (68) of orders issued. The high number of orders related to fall protection related suggests that the construction industry may require more oversight by the ministry in this regard.

Scaffolds are the preferred method for providing access to elevated work locations. In 2007, of the 195 construction–related critical injuries reported to the ministry, 22 involved scaffolds that did not comply with legislation. During the blitz inspectors issued 32 orders for failure to comply with OHSA sections 125 to 142, which cover the safety of scaffolds.

The number of orders issued for personal protective equipment (see below) and the fall protection requirements shows that there remains room for improvement in the industry, and that inspectors were successful in targeting our selected group for enforcement during the blitz.

Personal protective equipment – Orders issued with respect to the personal protective equipment (PPE) (not including fall protection) represented nine per cent of orders issued during the blitz. Although this suggests that inspectors found that PPE was being worn as required in the majority of the workplaces visited during the blitz, there is still room for improvement in the construction industry.

Asbestos⁄roll–over protection⁄TQAA – Orders issued during the renovation⁄demolition blitz covered all sections of the legislation that apply to the construction industry, including orders under the asbestos regulation, and those related to roll–over protective structures (ROPS) requirements, and the requirements of the Trades Qualification and Apprenticeship Act.

Equipment maintenance⁄electrical hazards – Orders were issued for a range of other issues, including equipment maintenance, electrical hazards.

Underage workers – There were only two orders issued under Section 16, the minimum age requirement on construction projects. This indicates that inspectors found that the most employers visited are not employing workers under age 16. Nevertheless, statistical analysis suggests that that more than 200 underage workers may be employed across the province on construction projects in the demolition and renovation sectors.

Conclusion

The number of orders issued per field visit during the renovation⁄demolition blitz was approximately 10 per cent higher than the average for the construction program from April 1, 2007 to March 31, 2008. This indicates inspectors were finding contraventions of legislation during the blitz more frequently than during regular, non–blitz workplace visits.

The ratio of stop work orders to all orders decreased slightly as compared industry averages across all sectors, indicating that inspectors were finding serious violations of the legislation at a slightly lower rate than during routine inspections. This may reflect the difficulty in targeting these high risk, short duration workplaces at a time when hazardous work is under way, rather than an indication of safety in these projects. (Stop work orders are issued only when workers are in imminent danger.)

During the one–month blitz, orders were issued at a rate 10 per cent higher per field visit than for the construction program as a whole from April 1, 2007 to March 31, 2008 (2.43 per workplace visit versus 2.19 per visit). There remains an indication of the need for additional enforcement in the targeted sector.

The blitz succeeded in reaching the “target” group in way that the ministry believes will promote greater compliance with health and safety regulations.