Ontario Construction News staff writer
Here are some court bulletins from the Ministry of Labour, Training and Skills Development from earlier this year, reporting on convictions and fines for construction safety violations.
Critical injury results in $85,000 fine for Vaughan company (Feb. 8)
Convicted: 1086289 Ontario Inc. o/a Urban Electrical Contractors, 790 Creditstone
Rd., Vaughan.
Location of Workplace: 320 Bay St., Toronto.
Description of Offence: A worker performing work for 1086289 Ontario Inc. o/a Urban Electrical Contractors was critically injured at a construction project. As the worker was connecting electrical cables located in the main electrical switchboard at the project, an electrical explosion occurred. 1086289 Ontario Inc. o/a Urban Electrical Contractors failed to ensure that the power supply to the main electrical switchboard was disconnected and locked out of service before any work on the switchboard had begun, and kept disconnected and locked out of service while the work continued.
Date of Offence: March 8, 2020.
Date of Conviction: Jan. 27, 2022.
Penalty Imposed:
- Following a guilty plea at the Ontario Court of Justice in Toronto, 1086289 Ontario Inc. o/a Urban Electrical Contractors was fined $85,000 by Justice Callaghan.
- The court also imposed a 25-per-cent 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.
Background:
- On March 8, 2020, an electrician employed by 1086289 Ontario Inc. o/a Urban Electrical Contractors was working at a construction project entailing the renovation of an existing commercial building.
- As the worker was connecting electrical cables located in the main electrical switchboard at the project, an electrical explosion occurred, critically injuring the worker.
- An investigation of the incident by the Ministry of Labour concluded that the power supply to the main electrical switchboard was not disconnected and locked out of service before any work on the switchboard had begun and not kept disconnected and locked out of service while the work continued.
- The investigation found that 1086289 Ontario Inc. o/a Urban Electrical Contractors did commit the offence of failing, as an employer, to ensure that the measures and procedures prescribed by section 190(4) of Ontario Regulation 213/91, as amended, (the “Regulation for Construction Projects”), were carried out in the workplace. This was contrary to section 25(1)(c) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.O.1, as amended.
Critical Injury Results in $55,000 Fine for Goodwood Company (Feb. 17)
Convicted: Trisan General Contractors Inc., 5339 4th Concession Rd., Goodwood ON. Trisan provides high rise building restoration, demolition and other construction related services.
Location of Workplace: 18 Namco Rd., Etobicoke ON, M9W1M5
Description of Offence: A worker performing work for Trisan General Contractors Inc. was critically injured while working on an excavator. The employer failed to take the reasonable precaution of developing or implementing a safe procedure to ensure the worker was not exposed to a crushing hazard.
Date of Offence: Jan. 29, 2020
Date of Conviction: Jan. 28, 2022.
Penalty Imposed:
- Following a guilty plea in provincial offences court in Toronto, Trisan General Contractors Inc. was fined $55,000 by Justice of the Peace Quamina.
- The court also imposed a 25-per-cent 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.
Background:
- On January 29, 2020, a worker performing work for Trisan General Contractors Inc. was critically injured while working on an excavator at Trisan’s workplace.
- The worker was attempting to set a ‘position arm’ of an attachment to the lower jaw of the excavator. The boom of the excavator suddenly descended and caused the position arm to critically injure the worker.
- The injured worker was asked by a co-worker to assist in completing the installation of a ‘grapple’ attachment to the boom of an excavator.
- A ‘grapple’ attachment is attached to a boom of an excavator and consists of two ‘jaws’ which open and close to grab, collect, lift, and/or move material. Once the upper jaw of the grapple was secured to the boom, the remaining task was to attach the position arm of the boom to the lower jaw. This required aligning the mounting hole on the position arm with the mating hole on the lower jaw and then inserting a connecting pin through the holes.
- A Ministry of Labour, Training and Skills Development investigation revealed that the process used by the injured worker and the co-worker made it possible for the worker to be exposed to a crushing hazard.
- Accordingly, the employer committed the offence of failing to comply with section 25(2)(h) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
Workplace injury results in $100,000 fine for Guelph company (Feb. 10)
Convicted: Skyjack Inc., 287 Speedvale Ave. W., Guelph. The company is a manufacturer of elevating work platforms.
Location of Workplace: 201 Woodlawn Rd., Guelph.
Description of Offence: A worker suffered serious burns resulting from a spark from the welding process. The employer should have provided apparel sufficient to protect the worker from injury.
Date of Offence: Dec. 12, 2019.
Date of Conviction: Jan. 12, 2022.
Penalty Imposed:
- Following a guilty plea in provincial offences court in Guelph, Skyjack Inc. was fined $100,000 by Justice of the Peace Stinson.
- The court also imposed a 25-per-cent 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.
Background:
- On Dec. 12, 2019, a Skyjack Inc. worker was employed as a certified welder. While the worker was welding an assembly, a spark from the welding process fell into the pocket of the worker’s denim apron, resulting in the worker’s clothing catching fire.
- The denim apron and coveralls that the worker was wearing were found to have several failures.
- This is contrary to section 84(e) of Regulation 851, R.R.O 1990 as amended.