Introductory remarks by Co-Chairs
8:45 a.m. |
| |
 |
Panel 1:
IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENTS IN DUE DILIGENCE: THE COURTS WEIGH IN
9:00 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.
|
|
| |
|
| |
| TOPICS |
| |
This panel will explore important recent developments in the employer's obligation to exercise due diligence in providing a safe and healthy workplace. Highlighting the latest court decisions, including the final word from a significant case out of the Ontario Court of Appeal, this panel will grapple with difficult issues which continue to defy easy answers. Topics to be discussed will include: |
| |
|
| |
 How does the concept of due diligence relate to the general duty imposed on employers to ensure compliance with occupational health and safety legislation, to train, instruct, and supervise and to take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances for the protection of a worker? |
| |
|
| |
When is the employer liable for the actions or neglect of supervisors? Who is a supervisor? Is an employer entitled to rely upon a claim by a supervisor that he or she was duly diligent in carrying out his or her health and safety responsibilities? |
| |
|
| |
Can an employer avoid liability under the Act by claiming that a supervisor or employee acted in violation of company policies, or committed a "rogue" act? Must an employer impose discipline for health and safety violations in order to assert due diligence? |
| |
|
| |
Can an employer be held liable for the actions of a person who was contracted by the employer to work as a supervisor? Who is responsible for the actions of contractors and subcontractors? |
| |
|
| |
Can employers rely on work experience and apprenticeship training, and/or referrals from union hiring halls, to meet the standard of due diligence? |
| |
|
| |
To what extent can an employer rely upon the existence of policies or procedures to establish due diligence? |
| |
BREAK
10:15 a.m. to 10:45 a.m. |
| |
|
|
Panel 2:
DEALING PROACTIVELY WITH EVOLVING WORKPLACE HAZARDS: ERGONOMIC GUIDELINES, OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE LIMITS AND MORE
10:45 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
|
|
| |
| SPEAKERS |
 |
|
Dr. Maurice Bitran
Director
Occupational Health and Safety Branch, Operations Division, Ontario Ministry of Labour |
| |
|
|
 |
|
Lisa Kozma
Counsel
Ford Canada |
| |
|
|
 |
|
Laura Lozanski
Occupational Health & Safety Officer
Canadian Association for University Teachers |
| |
|
|
 |
|
Luisa Natarelli
Senior Prevention Program Specialist
Workplace Safety and Insurance Board |
|
| |
| TOPICS |
| |
Each year, new workplace hazards are identified by government regulators. Employers, supervisors and workers are required to know and comply with various regulations to prevent workplace hazards. Lancaster's panel of experts will provide an update on recent changes to legislation, regulations, policies and guidelines, particularly in Ontario, but with reference to changes in other jurisdictions, in relation to ergonomics, asbestos, electrical safety, heat stress and more. Issues to be covered include: |
| |
|
| |
How are Occupational Exposure Limits (OELs) and other safety standards determined and defined, and what is their significance in the workplace health and safety compliance system? |
| |
|
| |
What is heat stress and what are some hazards associated with heat stress? In which industries are illness and injury associated with heat stress most common? How can employers modify the work environment to reduce or eliminate exposure to heat stress, and what is required by new guidelines? |
| |
|
| |
What recent changes have been made to the regulation of confined spaces, and what new obligations have been created? |
| |
|
| |
Asbestos update: what inspection, equipment and work procedure obligations have been created through recent regulatory initiatives? |
| |
|
| |
What are the risks of exposure to elevated noise levels? What obligations are imposed by new regulations around industrial noise exposure? |
| |
|
| |
What impact will the new Canadian Standards Association standard concerning electrical safety in the workplace have on Canadian workplaces? |
| |
|
| |
Cross-jurisdictional comparison of ergonomic regulations: What Canadian jurisdictions have implemented regulations to address musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs)? What does Ontario have in place in relation to MSDs? What constitutes an MSD? How should an employer identify and control ergonomic-related hazards? What criteria should employers use to evaluate the effectiveness of a hazard control program? |
| |
|
Lunch: 12:00 p.m. to 1:15 p.m. |
| |
|
|
Panel 3:
EVOLVING APPROACHES TO
INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
1:15 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.
|
|
| |
| SPEAKERS |
 |
|
Mary Beth Currie
Employer Counsel
Bennett Jones |
| |
|
|
 |
|
Wayne De L'Orme
Provincial Coordinator
Industrial Program, Ontario Ministry of Labour |
| |
|
|
 |
|
Nancy Hutchison
National Health and Safety Representative - District 6
United Steelworkers |
|
| |
| TOPICS |
| |
Government agencies charged with enforcing health and safety standards in workplaces are taking an increasingly proactive approach, targeting particular workplaces and sectors for inspection, permitting the exchange of information about employers among different regulatory branches of government, and improving the enforcement tools available to inspectors. Further, Bill C-45, which came into effect in 2004, changed the rules with respect to criminal liability of corporations and other organizations. Lancaster's panel of experts will discuss the legislative and policy changes leading to this transformation in inspection and enforcement approaches and the impact this shift has had on workplace safety. Issues discussed will include: |
| |
|
| |
Corporate criminal responsibility and Bill C-45: What charges have been brought against employers under section 217.1 of the Criminal Code and with what outcomes? |
| |
|
| |
What criteria are used to target employers for workplace inspections under the new Safe At Work Ontario's compliance strategy? How does this approach compare to the enforcement strategies adopted by WorkSafe B.C.? |
| |
|
| |
Which sectors have been identified for proactive inspections because of "sector-specific hazards" inherent to the activities of the business? What sector-specific action plans have been developed, for example in the health-care sector? |
| |
|
| |
What other new enforcement tools, such as increasing fines, "on-the-spot" offence notices, and more aggressive prosecutions, are being used to improve compliance with workplace health and safety legislation across Canada and to encourage deterrence? Have these strategies been successful? When is jail an appropriate penalty? |
| |
|
| |
What is the purpose of the Regulatory Modernization Act in Ontario, and how might it affect inspections and occupational health and safety compliance? |
| |
|
BREAK: 2:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. |
| |
|
|
Panel 4:
TACKLING WORKPLACE VIOLENCE AND HARASSMENT AS A HEALTH AND SAFETY PROBLEM
3:00 p.m. to 4:15 p.m.
|
|
| |
|
| |
| TOPICS |
| |
| Workplace violence and harassment is on the radar screen of governments across the country, as evidenced by the wave of anti-violence and harassment legislation that has recently been passed across Canada. Health and safety legislation, which imposes on employers a general duty to provide a safe workplace, has become the chosen tool of law makers to address the growing problem of violence in the workplace. These new legislative initiatives take a 'proactive' approach, placing the onus on employers and their employees to identify and take steps to prevent violence before it occurs. Our panel will examine the latest legislative and judicial developments in this area and explain some of the newly defined employee rights, as well as how the employer can meet its duty to provide for a harassment and violence free workplace. Topics discussed will include: |
| |
|
| |
What steps has the federal government proposed to address violence in workplaces under federal jurisdiction, including introducing regulations under section 125 of the Canada Labour Code? |
| |
|
| |
What regulatory schemes to address workplace violence and/or harassment have been implemented in other Canadian jurisdictions, including Nova Scotia, Manitoba, Alberta, Saskatchewan, B.C. and Quebec? Have regulatory initiatives been proposed in provinces without current regulation? |
| |
|
| |
Which jurisdictions impose on employers an obligation to conduct a violence risk assessment? How can an employer properly assess the risk of violence in a workplace? Which industries or settings (ie. working alone) have been identified as having a greater risk of violence? |
| |
|
| |
What else, beyond risk assessment, is involved in developing a good workplace violence prevention policy, including introducing systematic controls and corrective measures, providing training, and creating emergency protocols and investigation procedures? |
| |
|
| |
What is the scope of the duty to warn of workplace violence and/or harassment risks? Can the threat of violence and/or harassment justify work refusals? And, if so, how must those be handled in order to comply with health and safety legislation? |
| |
|
| |
Are health and safety compliance systems equipped to deal with violence and/or harassment issues? |
| |
Conference ends
4:15 p.m. |
| |
