Access Canada Magazine October 2012

Scaffold Industry Association of Canadawww.scaffoldaccess.ca

ACCESS CANADA

October 2012Publication AdreementNo. 41440042

- The Corporate Criminal Liability Landscape in Canada.- Scaffolder Upgrade Policy (Atlantic Canada)

Publication AdreementNo. 41440042

For Safety, Quality and Productivity use the Professionally Trained and Certified members of the Carpenters Union

The only Union you need for all your Scaffold building requirements

222 Rowntree Dairy Road Woodbridge ON L4L 9T2 Phone: 905-652-4140 Fax: 905-652-4139 www.carpenterdc.com

ACCESS CANADA www.scaff oldaccess.ca OCTOBER 2012

COMMITTEES 2011 - 2013 FALL PROTECTIONJohn [email protected]

MAST CLIMBING PLATFORMSJim [email protected]

PEWPSGraham [email protected]

SWINGSTAGEIan [email protected]

MEMBERSHIPChris [email protected] TRAINING John [email protected]

WEBSITEBill Nasrala [email protected] FORMING & SHORINGMichael [email protected]

EDITOR IN CHIEF John O’[email protected]

EDITOR Bill [email protected]

ADVERTISING Bill [email protected]

LEGAL CONTRIBUTOR Cheryl [email protected] PRODUCTION ADVISOR Al [email protected]

MEMBERSHIP Chris [email protected]

TECHNICAL ADVISOR Jim Wilkinson [email protected]

TECHNICAL ADVISOR John [email protected] ACCESS CANADA Magazine is Published by the staff of the Scaffold Industry Association of Canada. The magazine’s content does not refl ect the opinion of the Scaffold Industry Association of Canada, nor does the Association assume any responsibility for articles and artwork. Canada Post Publications MailAgreement No. 41440042. Please return undeliverable Canadian addresses to: SIAC, 116 Greenshire Drive Hamilton, Ontario L9C 7G5 Tel: 905-387-3646

4 President’s Report. 5 Klimer Manufacturing Inc. Press Release. 7 Let’s Talk About …Aluminum Access Towers. 9 Legal Issues. 15 Th e Real Hazard-An Incomplete Job Survey, Part 2 of 2. 16 Skyway Canada Profi le. 20 Industrial Strenth Bracing.22 Winter Netting. 24 Heavy Loads Mastered Easily - with Layher.26 Scaff older Upgrade policy (Atlantic Canada). 31 Rooftop Rigging Innovation. 33 HKF 5th Annual Golf Tournament.

articles

For Membership and Advertising info@scaff oldaccess.ca

3

Table of Contents Cover: Courtesy of Skyhigh Canada, a Division of Skyway Canada

Canadian Museum for Human Rights, Winnipeg MB

www.skycan.ca


From the President..................................................................Summer Time

4

John O’Hara is President of Orbital Scaffold Services.You can contact him at (647) 991-3047 or e-mail [email protected]

Scaff old Industry Association of Canada - Ontario Chapter

J hh OO’H’H ii PP iidd tt ff OO bibitt ll SS ffff ldld SS ii

Having recently returned from the SAIA convention in Huntington Beach, California, I can honestly say that there have been tremendous steps forward in the convention during the last few years and kudos to outgoing President Stephen Smith and his team for these positive changes.

One of the many interesting sessions I attended was a panel discussion that included Health and Safety executives from some of the larger construction companies in North America. Of special note was the safe working at height debate and what measures are being taken to ensure that the scaffold erector is protected at all times during both construction and removal of the scaffold structure.

It was commented by a panel member that fall prevention by means of advanced guardrails currently in use in many parts of Europe as opposed to fall protection that is the current method in North America should be seriously considered for future safe working at height practice. Having seen both in use there is no doubt that prevention by means of “Collective Protection Guidance” currently in use in the United Kingdom is the standard that we should be adopting in Canada.

During the convention the SIAC held our annual national meeting that was very well attended and discussions on several topics meant for a very lively evening session. One item of note was the completion of the DVD on User Scaffold Hazard Awareness by the Western Canadian Chapter which is a comprehensive twenty six minute concise introduction to many of the hazards that face users of scaffold structures. The DVD is available from the SAIA training centre or contact your local Accredited Training Institute for further details.

The Western Canadian Chapter also reported that application has been made to the Alberta Government for red seal for “Trade Occupation for Industrial Scaffolding” and vote on this was expected in the fall session. On the same topic Atlantic Canada Chapter reported that the Regional Council of Carpenters, Millwrights and Allied Workers have compiled a “Scaffolder Upgrade Policy” that states that “in order to work on any UBC site, members must have a scaffolding certifi cate from a recognized training program”, that includes Apprentice levels 2 and 3 prior to achieving Journeyman status. This new policy will be effective September 01, 2012.

With the approval of the Regional Council the entire document is included in this issue and is another major step in the right direction to ensure individuals are trained to recognized standards in the scaffold industry. Now if only Unions in other Provinces, not currently participating in scaffold training would adopt this Policy, we might just be on the way to creating a uniform Journeyman Certifi cation for scaffolders in Canada.

The Suspended Access committee continues to participate in the proposed revision to the current regulations however there has been no further meetings since April and we still have not had the opportunity to present our case to the Minister after the MOL advised us that they intended to include all scaffolds in the April 2012 amendments to the proposed revisions.

The CSA 269.2 M87 Standard proposed revision needs funding and I would ask all stakeholders within the Access and Scaffold Industry and all users to seriously consider contributing to the funds that will be required to move forward with this initiative. The entire industry will benefi t from an updated Standard for the Design and Testing of scaffold in Canada.

Finally we recently held our annual Harold K. Forbes Memorial golf tournament at Diamond Back G.C. A wonderful day was had by all with some record scores, great weather and time to renew some old

acquaintances.

Ofrdc

Imcm

BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2011-2013

PRESIDENTJohn O’[email protected]

ADVISOR TO THE PRESIDENTAl [email protected]

SECRETARYChris Earnshaw [email protected]

TREASURERGraham [email protected] DIRECTORRoger [email protected]

INTERNATIONAL DIRECTORJohn [email protected]

DIRECTOROwen [email protected]

DIRECTORBill [email protected]

DIRECTORJames [email protected] DIRECTORMichael Van [email protected]

SIAC NATIONAL COUNCIL Al Squire, Chairman Ontario Chapter John O’Hara Ontario Chapter Julie Rainville Quebec Chapter Randy Dwernychuk Western Canada Chapter Gary Bilodeau Western Canada Chapter Wendy Larison Western Canada Chapter Eric Roberts Atlantic Canada Chapter


5

Klimer Manufacturing Inc. Press Release

Swingstage® Division1-800-465-4738

Tel: 416-298-8822 Fax: 416-298-1053

Griphoist® Division1-800-421-0246

Tel: 781-401-3288 Fax: 781-828-3642

Fallstop® Division1-800-561-3229

Tel: 514-493-3332 Fax: 514-493-3342

Three Divisions One Mission - Worker Safety

Tractel®, Griphoist® Division offers a completeline of man-riding equipment products, includ-ing the Tirak® seriestraction hoist, Blocstop® secondary brake,Scafor® manual hoist, Skysafe® modular plat-forms, Skybeam suspension systems,Portafix® suspension systems, and muchmore.

Tractel® Swingstage® the premier leader indesign, engineering, manufacturing and sup-ply of building access and window washingequipment. Having designed permanentbuilding maintenance equipment, installedon some of the highest and most presti-gious structures in the world.

Fallstop® offers complete fall protectionsystems, from full body harness and lan-yards to patented devices such asTravsafe® lifeline system, the Blocfor® self-retracting lifeline, the Stopfor® rope grabsand the Derope® emergency escape / con-trolled descent device.

w w w . t r a c t e l . c o m

A Trusted name... A passion for heights... A natural evolution...


Let’s Talk About …Aluminum Access Towers

Aluminum Access Towers are the quick-erect aluminum towers we generally see used in school gymnasiums and such. Their main purpose is to let workers reach a height where they can do the work required, such as changing light bulbs in the ceiling, and so on.

For the most part, manufacturers of Aluminum Access Towers are members of an association like our SSFI (Scaffold, Shoring and Forming Institute), called PASMA (Prefabricated Access Suppliers’ and Manufacturers’ Association). PASMA is the recognized focus and authority for mobile access towers. As such, it promotes safety, standards and best practices across a wide range of sectors and represents the interests of manufacturers, suppliers, specifi ers and users.There are numerous manufacturers and brand names of aluminum access towers. The following is a list of those identifi ed on the PASMA web site:

TOWER BRAND NAMES MANUFACTURERS’ WEB SITES

Aliscaff, Aliscaff Span Tower, Aliscaff Stairladder Tower, Aliscaff Stairwell, Aliscaff Quad Tower

www.aliscaff.co.uk

Alto Tower, MD Tower, Room Scaffold, Pulpit www.alto-towers.co.ukKlik Tower, Klik Fold, Klik Stairwell, Klik Stak, Klik Minifold, Klik Microfold, Klik Guardrail Post

www.eurotowers.co.uk

EIGER500, EIGER200, EIGER100, EIGERDECK www.popupproducts.co.ukBoss Tower, Snaplok Tower, Easi-build Tower, Climalloy Tower, Zig Zag Tower, Hi-way Tower, Room Mate, Minimax

www.youngmangroup.com

OCTO® 250 BetaGuard® Tower, OCTO® 500 BetaGuard® Tower, BETA® BetaGuard® Tower, Sigmadeck, Omegadeck, Alphastep, Deltadeck

www.turner-access.co.uk

Instant Tower, Zip Up Tower, Spandeck, Snappy www.instantupright.comHelix, HiLyte, LIFT System, StairLyte www.lyteladders.co.uk

Aluminum Access Towers, because they are manufactured in Europe, are tested to ensure they conform with the EN 1004 specifi cation. They are intended to be Light-Duty scaffolds, intended to support only workers and their tools.

The members of PASMA have developed a procedure for installing guardrails in advance of the workers arriving onto the elevated work platform. The procedure, referred to as 3T or Through The Trap, depends on different sizes of Base Frames being available. If the working platform is to be an odd number of metres (i.e. 3,5,7,9 etc.) above the support surface, 2 metre frames should be used as base frames. This allows the fi rst temporary erection deck to be fi tted at 1 metre, leaving a metre of frame height above it for attaching guardrails prior to accessing the level. Subsequent decks are placed at 2 metre intervals above the initial erection deck, giving odd (3,5,7 metre etc.) deck heights. In this manner, guardrails are always in place before the worker accesses the platform. Similarly, if the working platform is to be an even number of metres above the supporting surface, the base frames would be 3 metre frames.

The procedure is not quite intuitive, but with practice, it becomes second nature. We won’t go into the procedure here, but if it should be required, the supplier can provide detailed instructions. Suffi cient training, combined with necessary experience, must also be considered and be appropriate to achieve competency to undertake basic assembly of mobile access towers.

7

By John Rosenthal, P. Eng. [email protected]@dunn-wright.ca

FoatrTa

ACCESS CANADA www.scaff oldaccess.ca OCTOBER 2012 8

As with any rolling tower, the SIAC Code of Safe Practice should be referred to and followed.

Because the towers are light in weight, they require stabilizers or outriggers to ensure their stability. It’s necessary to be aware of the positioning of the stabilizers, as they must be set on such an angle to the frames, so that the overall base dimensions of the tower are equal.

This type of tower is intended to be climbed from the inside of the tower, using the horizontal members of the frames. Some manufacturers provide frames with a built-in ladder. Working platforms for Single-Wide towers all have trap doors for access to the working level. Double-Width towers may use trap door platforms on one side of the tower, and solid platforms on the other.

The advantage of climbing on the inside of the tower is that there is no danger of creating an overturning moment. Another advantage is that, as long as the worker remembers to close the trap door behind him/her, the maximum fall distance is 2 metres. Often, the manufacturer’s instructions state that the access to each level should be staggered – climbing one end of the scaffold to reach one level, and then traversing to the opposite end of the tower to climb to the next level.

Tower components should be handled with care in order to avoid damage to either the person handling the equipment

or the equipment itself. Components need to be fi rmly secured and properly supported, when being transported, to prevent damage. In long term storage, towers should be protected from the weather. Prior to use, all tower components must be inspected for signs of damage or defects. Damaged, defective or incorrect components must be marked as unfi t for use, withdrawn from use and either repaired or destroyed. Casters and adjustable legs should be periodically lubricated to keep them free running.

Each manufacturer has a variety of frame heights and widths, and all sorts of accessory components to help make the best use of the product. Once a particular product has been chosen, it is wise to keep in touch with the manufacturer’s representative to be able to make the best use of the equipment. The more your supplier knows about your business and how you carry out your work, the better the SUPPLIER CAN ASSIST YOU IN SELECTING AND USING THE MOST ADVANTAGEOUS BITS AND PIECES TO DO YOUR JOB.

Let’s Talk About …Aluminum Access Towers


Legal Issues

By Jeremy Warning, Cheryl Edwards & Shane D. Todd

9


Legal Issues

• Demonstrates how Bill C-45 has managed to broaden the means by which to prove criminal negligence. The Metron case appears to show that one of the main objectives in amending the Criminal Code – making it easier to obtain criminal negligence convictions against organizations – has been met. Whether this will embolden police and prosecutors to pursue more corporate criminal negligence charges following workplace accidents remain to be seen.

In this Update, we discuss the significance of the case and what it represents in the evolution of corporate criminal liability for health and safety in Canada.

Basis for the Criminal Negligence Finding: The Detailed Facts Revealed

Several of the facts about the December 24, 2009 accident are common knowledge due to the media coverage of this event. However, the facts presented to the court to support a conviction on the charge of criminal negligence causing death reveal significant details that were not widely known. Those facts allow for fuller context on the accident and should be considered by all organizations.

a) Liability Founded on Behaviour of Site Supervisor

The agreed facts reveal that the conduct that attracts criminal liability to Metron is entirely that of the Site Supervisor – one of the deceased. It was agreed that the Site Supervisor was a “senior officer” of Metron. He was responsible for managing an important aspect of the organization’s activities – the construction project at 2757 Kipling Avenue – and he had a duty to take reasonable steps to prevent injury to the workers he was managing. This is notable because, prior to the enactment of Bill C-45, the Site Supervisor was not someone whose conduct would likely attract criminal liability for the corporation. He was not employed directly by Metron. He had his own construction company and was hired by the Project Manager who has also been charged under the Criminal Code and the Occupational Health and Safety Act. As such, Metron’s conviction demonstrates how Bill C-45 has expanded the potential routes for establishing criminal negligence by a corporation.

Organizations should take note. Establishing liability based on the conduct of a person like the Site Supervisor may not prove unique to Metron. It is common for organizations to have site supervisors, branch, store or plant managers, or some equivalent position.

Individuals in these roles are not typically in the upper echelons of the corporate hierarchy, but do have a high degree of responsibility and authority

at a localized level. Based on the definition of “senior officer” in the Criminal Code it does not appear likely that the result would have been different if the Metron case involved a larger, more hierarchical organization. Metron demonstrates that the behaviour of people with a high degree of localized responsibility can attract criminal liability for an entire organization.

b) Positive Steps Taken by Corporation

What is also significant about the criminal negligence being grounded solely on the conduct of the Site Supervisor is that his conduct displaced a number of positive steps that were taken by Metron prior to the accident. The facts accepted in court reveal that Metron had taken several steps inconsistent with wanton and reckless disregard for the lives and safety of the workers on the project. The Crown agreed that Metron representatives had:

• Required that before any work commenced, the owner of the building arrange for an engineering inspection and recertification of the roof anchors to ensure compliance with safety requirements;

• At all times, been cooperative and complied with all requests made by the Ministry of Labour inspector who had periodically inspected the project from October to December 2009;

• Conducted periodic meetings with the Ministry of Labour inspector;

• Arranged for the Project Manager to take a three-day swing stage training course, which included some fall arrest training, through the Construction Safety Association of Ontario (“CSAO”) now IHSA;

• Arranged for the Project Manager to attend, immediately after the three-day course, another CSAO course that provided instruction on how to train workers regarding the safe and proper use of suspended access equipment;

• Made arrangements for the Site Supervisor to take a fall arrest course, provided by a third-party training provider, and a swing stage operations course provided by the Project Manager;

• Arranged for other workers on the project to take a fall arrest course and swing stage operations course that were to be taught by the Project Manager or the third-party training provider;

• Ordered copies of a comprehensive safety

manual and instructed that a copy be given to each worker;

• Conducted periodic meetings with

workers, during the project, to review safety requirements including the use of swing stages; and

• As dictated by the Metron Safety Manual, performed weekly job site inspections, which referenced both swing stages and fall protection equipment, and were recorded and submitted to Metron.

It was also agreed that Metron’s president attended the project at least once per week and that he had not observed any violations on the site.

c) Conduct of Third-Party Swing Stage Provider

In addition, factors contributed to the accident that did not directly involve the conduct of Metron. The agreed facts indicate a significant cause of the swing stage collapse was the design, including thatthe welding completed by or for the swing stage manufacturer was defective. Had the design, including the welds, not been defective, it was agreed that the swing stage would likely not have collapsed.

The agreed facts also detail that the involved swing stage was assembled by Metron workers under the supervision of the Site Supervisor and/or Project Manager and consisted of components that did not have markings or identifiers regarding the stage’s maximum capacity as required by industry standard and the OHSA. As well, post-accident examination of the swing stage revealed that the welds were cracked and broken prior to the collapse and the pin or bolt holes that connected the swing stage’s modules were stressed, worn and elongated. The agreed facts do not indicate whether these conditions were something that ought to have been detected by Metron or were otherwise evidence of a marked departure from the standards expected. d) Conduct of Site Supervisor Displaces Positive Steps by Corporation

The conduct of the Site Supervisor that displaced the positive steps that were taken by Metron, and was agreed as sufficient to render Metron criminally negligent, included:

1. Directing or permitting six workers to work on the swing stage when he knew, or should have known, that it was unsafe to do so. The accident occurred close to the end of the working day and the men had boarded the swing stage to travel to the ground to prepare to close and leave the project. The swing stage that was in use would have been rated to carry 1,000 pounds. The weight of the six workers and the construction equipment that was with them would have exceeded the rated capacity of the swing stage.

10


2. Directing or permitting six workers to board the swing stage knowing that only two lifelines were available. The usual practice was to only have two workers on the swing stage at a time. The workers on the swing stage, given the height at which they were working, were required by the OHSA and industry standard to be protected by a fall arrest system. As part of a fall arrest system, each worker is to have their own lifeline. At the time of the accident, there were only two lifelines available for the six workers on the swing stage.

3. Permitting workers under the influence of drugs to work on the project. The agreed facts reveal that post-mortem toxicological analysis determined that three of the four deceased, including the Site Supervisor, had marijuana in their system. The level at which it was detected was consistent with recent ingestion. The agreed facts do not indicate anything about possible impairment or potential marijuana use by the Project Manager or the two workers who survived the accident.

A review of the agreed facts suggests that these factors were considered cumulatively to establish that Metron had failed to take reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm and death and, in so doing, had demonstrated wanton and reckless disregard for the lives or safety of others. We do not know if any of these actions, taken alone, would be sufficient to establish criminal negligence. Criminal negligence is not established by the mere breach of a health and safety requirement or industry standard. There must be wanton or reckless disregard for lives or safety before the departure from a legislated or industry standard becomes criminal.

The Sentences and Their Signifi cance

a) Metron’s President

The $90,000 fine imposed on Metron’s president is the highest monetary penalty ever imposed against an individual convicted of an offence under the OHSA. Previously, the highest monetary penalty imposed on an individual had been a fine of $70,000. The fine imposed also exceeds that levied against the first defendant charged following the enactment of Bill C-45. In 2005, the owner of a small contracting firm, who was charged with one count of criminal negligence causing death after a worker was killed by the collapse of an excavation, pleaded guilty to three charges under the OHSA and was fined $50,000. As a result of the pleas to the OHSA charges, the Crown withdrew the Criminal Code charge.

b) Metron

The sentence of $200,000 imposed on Metron is the highest ever imposed for a criminal negligence conviction involving workplace health and safety

in Canadian history. Prior to this decision there had only been one prior sentence imposed on a corporation since the passage of Bill C-45. That was a $100,000 fine imposed in 2008 on Transpavé Inc. The St-Eustache, Quebec based company pleaded guilty to one charge of criminal negligence causing death after a worker was crushed in a machine. However, in Transpavé the fine imposed was jointly recommended by the Crown and defendant. A joint submission was not presented in Metron and, in argument, the Crown had asked the court to impose a penalty of $1,000,000 – ten times more than was imposed on Transpavé – while Metron argued that the court should impose a fine of $100,000.

The court did not utilize the option available to it under the Criminal Code to place a corporation on probation and impose conditions. Amongst other powers, when imposing probation the court has the power to require a corporation to:

• make restitution to a person for any loss or damage that they suffered as a result of the offence; and/or

• provide information to the public, in the manner directed by the court, setting out the offence committed, the sentence imposed and any measures the corporation is taking to reduce the chance of a subsequent offence; and/or

• comply with any other reasonable conditions to prevent the commission of subsequent offences or to remedy the harm caused by the offence.

Probation was not addressed during the sentencing submissions of the Crown or defence which made it less likely to be imposed. Candidly, all of the circumstances of the case – which includes its notoriety and pending civil claims filed against Metron – may have minimized the utility of a probation order. Beyond its quantum, the sentence is interesting because the court sentenced Metron for the death of the Site Supervisor and the others killed in the accident. This is interesting because the SiteSupervisor and Metron were treated as one for the purpose of finding Metron guilty of criminal negligence: the Site Supervisor’s conduct was the conduct of Metron. However, for sentencing purposes, the Site Supervisor was considered a victim of Metron’s criminal negligence. As such, the decision in Metron suggests that not only can the senior officer impute criminal liability to an organization, if that senior officer is injured or killed as a result of their conduct, the organization will be sentenced for that death or injury the same as for any other victim. Consequently, organizations should take note that they may be sentenced for all harm resulting from a criminal negligence conviction notwithstanding that the perpetrator of the criminal negligence is among the victims.

c) Sentencing Principles Under the Criminal Code - Corporations

The Criminal Code sets no minimum or maximum penalty when a corporation is convicted of criminal negligence causing death, meaning there is no limit on the amount of the fine that may be imposed on a corporate defendant. That said, the Criminal Code does require that the sentence imposed be proportional to the gravity of the offence and the culpability or blameworthiness of the defendant. As well, a sentence is to adhere to the principle of parity such that similar sentences are imposed on defendants convicted of similar offences in similar circumstances.

In order to guide a court in sentencing corporate defendants, the amendments to the Criminal Code made by Bill C-45 also augmented the sentencing factors to be considered by a court. In addition to the principles noted above, the Criminal Code requires a court to consider factors that are specific to corporate defendants including:

• any advantage realized by the organization as a result of the offence;

• the degree of planning involved in carrying out the offence and the duration and complexity of the offence;

• whether the organization has attempted to conceal its assets, or convert them, in order to show that it is not able to pay a fine or make restitution;

• the impact that the sentence would have on the economic viability of the organization and the continued employment of its employees;

• the cost to public authorities of the investigation and prosecution of the offence;

• any regulatory penalty imposed on the

organization or one of its representatives in respect of the conduct that formed the basis of the offence;

• whether the organization was — or any of its representatives who were involved in the commission of the offence were — convicted of a similar offence or sanctioned by a regulatory body for similar conduct; and

• any measures that the organization has taken to reduce the likelihood of it committing a subsequent offence.

In this way, the Criminal Code has a flexible set of sentencing criteria designed to guide a court without suggesting or prescribing the amount or nature of the penalty to be imposed.

11

i i i i i k2 Directing or permitting six worke

Legal Issues


In Metron, the court applied these factors as follows:

• Advantage: Although Metron had been offered a $50,000 bonus for the completion of work by December 29th, there was no evidence that the bonus was related to the incident and therefore, there was no advantage realized by Metron as a result of the offence.

• Planning and Complexity: The court found no evidence of planning or complexity. It accepted that the accident resulted from a momentary lapse of judgment because there was no evidence that the swing stage had previously been used by more than two workers, that workers had previously not used safety lines, or that workers had used intoxicants before using the swing stage. However, the court noted that Metron had contravened health and safety regulations for almost two months because the company operated the swing stage without a manual, instructions or other production information, and despite the fact that the swing stage did not have any marking, serial number or labels about maximum capacity. The court found this to be an aggravating factor to be considered in sentencing.

• Conversion/Concealment of Assets: The court heard evidence and argument from the Crown that Metron was attempting to resurrect its business through a related corporation of which Metron’s president was the president and sole director, but concluded the evidence fell short of establishing that Metron was attempting to conceal or convert its assets.

• Cost to Public Authorities: Metron’s guilty plea had significantly reduced the cost of prosecuting the offence.

• Regulatory Penalties: The court considered that Metron’s president had been sentenced to a $90,000 fine under the OHSA.

• Prior Offences or Sanctions: Neither Metron nor its representatives had any prior convictions or sanctions for similar conduct.

• Company Penalties: Metron did not impose a

penalty on any representative for the offence.

• Economic Viability: This was one of the most important factors in the sentencing. The court heard evidence that a significant fine could drive the company into insolvency. In particular, the court heard that the company operated at a loss in 2010 and 2011, had substantial but unspecified amounts of debt, was owed substantial unpaid and potentially uncollectable accounts receivable, and was involved in litigation that could have financial consequences. The court noted that the

economic viability of Metron was impossible to accurately predict, but concluded that imposing the $1,000,000 fine requested by the Crown would likely result in bankruptcy and would violate the Criminal Code requirement to consider the defendant’s ability to pay. The court noted, however, that the company had a long history of success and may yet survive its precarious financial circumstances and took particular note of the fact that the company could apply for an extension of time to pay the fine if the company was unable to pay the fine within the time required.

It was after considering all of these factors that the court determined that a fine of $200,000 was appropriate. The court noted that the $342,500 in fines and surcharges payable by Metron and its president, which amounted to three times Metron’s net earnings in its last profitable year (the year before the accident), would send a clear message to all businesses of the overwhelming importance of ensuring worker safety.

d) Comparison to Sentencing for Corporate Manslaughter in theUnited Kingdom

Sentencing corporations under the Criminal Code can be contrasted with the approach to sentencing for violations of the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 (“Corporate Manslaughter Act”) in the United Kingdom. After that Act was passed, a sentencing guideline was created, which set out the factors to be considered by a court when sentencing a corporation in circumstances where one or more persons have been killed as a result of an offence. While many of the factors set out in the guideline are consistent with the factors the Criminal Code requires a court to consider, the guideline contains more prescriptive commentary. In fact, with reference to sentencing a corporation convicted of corporate manslaughter, the guideline indicates that, because of the nature of the offence the, “appropriate fine will seldom be less than £500,000 and may be measured in millions of pounds”. It also appears that courts in the United Kingdom will not place as much weight on the corporation’s ability to pay a penalty as the courts in Canada will. Since the Corporate Manslaughter Act was enacted, there has been one sentence imposed on a corporation. In 2011, Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings was sentenced to pay a fine of £385,000 after it was convicted of corporate manslaughter.One of its employees was killed after an unsupported pit collapsed. When imposing the penalty, the sentencing judge commented that the payment of the penalty (which the judge suggested could be paid over ten years) may well put Cotswold into liquidation. However, the court’s view was that was an unfortunate and unavoidable consequence of a serious breach. The penalty was upheld on appeal.

Criminal Negligence for Workplace Safety: A Reminder

a) The Genesis of Bill C-45 Amendments to the Criminal Code Metron is the first corporate criminal negligence conviction in Ontario, the second in Canada, since Bill C-45 amended the Criminal Code on March 31, 2004. The genesis of Bill C-45 was the 1992 Westray mine explosion in Nova Scotia in which twenty-six miners were killed. No criminal or regulatory convictions were obtained against Westray or its management notwithstanding evidence that Westray management intentionally subverted health and safety prior to the explosion. Indeed, the Public Inquiry that was struck by the Nova Scotia government following the accident concluded:

Westray managers not only failed to promote and nurture any kind of a safe work ethic but actually discouraged any meaningful dialogue on safety issues. Management did so through an aggressive and authoritarian attitude towards the employees, as well as by the use of offensive and abusive language. Westray workers quickly came to realize that their safety concerns fell on deaf ears and that management’s open-door policy was mere window dressing. In addressing the absence of criminal liability for the accident, the Public Inquiry recommended legislative amendments designed to ensure that corporate executives and directors could be legally accountable for workplace safety. However, the Public Inquiry did not recommend a specific legislative change:

The Government of Canada, through the Department of Justice, should institute a study of the accountability of corporate executives and directors for the wrongful or negligent acts of the corporation and should introduce in the Parliament of Canada such amendments to legislation as are necessary to ensure that corporate executives and directors are held properly accountable for workplace safety.

b) The Bill C-45 Amendments in 2004

A few years after the report and recommendations were released, the Federal government passed Bill C-45 which significantly changed the manner in which corporate criminal negligence could be proven. Most significantly, Bill C-45 amended the Criminal Code to broaden or expand the Crown’s ability to prove criminal negligence. Prior to the Bill C-45 amendments, in order to convict a corporation of criminal negligence, the Crown would have to prove that the “directing mind” of the corporation showed wanton and reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons.

12

iiIIInIn MMMM tetetroronn ttthhhehe ccoou trtrt aapppplilililieded t

Legal Issues


This concept, known as the “Identification Theory”, made prosecuting charges of criminal negligence against a corporation a difficult task because it was challenging to prove that the conduct of the person or people constituting the directing mind of the corporation rose to the level necessary for criminal liability.

Bill C-45 expanded the means to establish corporate liability because it jettisoned the Identification Theory and made it possible for the Crown to prove the wanton and reckless disregard for lives or safety of others through the conduct of a corporate representative. In addition, the Crown is required to establish that a senior officer has failed to act. The term “senior officer”, which is set out above, is broadly defined in the Criminal Code to include people with varying degrees of managerial authority or responsibility. Metron demonstrates how Bill C-45 has broadened the means by which criminal negligence can be proven against a corporation because the actions of a mid- level manager and the Site Supervisor, attracted criminal liability for the organization.

Application of the Criminal Law to Date: A Restrained Approach

Notwithstanding the broadening of means to prove criminal negligence against a corporation, it was not intended that the Criminal Code would become the primary means of enforcing workplace health and safety standards in Canada. This is evident from statements made by the federal government prior to the enactment of Bill C-45 and anecdotally from how the criminal law has been used in matters of workplace safety since 2004.

In February 2002, after the Westray disaster and public inquiry, the Federal government referred the issue of extending the bases upon which criminal liability for corporations and senior officials could be found to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. The Committee tabled a report that recommended that the federal government, “table in the House legislation to deal with the criminal liability of corporations, directors, and officers”.19 This is a more specific recommendation than came out of the Westray Public Inquiry. In responding to the report, the government agreed that the Criminal Code needed to be amended. However, the government indicated there should be restraint in the application of the criminal law. The intentions of the government were quite clearly articulated in its response to the Committee as it wrote:

The criminal law must be reserved for the most serious offences, those that involve grave moral fault.

It is the view of the Government that the first line of defence against death and injury in the workplace is workplace safety and health regulation.

The Government does not intend to use the federal criminal law power to supplant or interfere with the provincial regulatory role in workplace health and safety. At the same time, the Government believes that the criminal law can provide an important additional level of deterrence if effectively targeted at – and enforced against – companies and individuals that show a reckless disregard for the safety of workers and the public. Anecdotal evidence available from our experience to date is that the Criminal Code has not displaced regulatory legislation as the primary means to enforce workplace health and safety standards. First, even following serious workplace accidents, police may attend, secure the scene of the accident and take some initial investigatory steps – usually consisting of photographs of the accident scene and interviews of witnesses to the accident – to rule out an intentional criminal act. Once the police are satisfied that no intentional criminal act was involved, their investigation usually ends and the matter is investigated by the workplace safety regulator.

Second, since Bill C-45 became law, there has not been a flood of criminal negligence prosecutions arising from workplace accidents. Since 2004 there have been approximately eight cases, including Metron, where workplace accidents have resulted in criminal negligence charges. A corporation has been the defendant in four of those cases. This statistic itself suggests a restrained approach to instituting criminal charges.

This model of restraint also appears to have been applied by the Crown Attorneys that have overseen the prosecution of cases, prior to Metron, in which criminal negligence charges were laid following a workplace accident. Crown Attorneys are requiredto screen criminal charges to determine the appropriateness of pursuing them. There are two principal bases upon which a charge is screened. First, the evidence is assessed to determine whethera reasonable prospect of conviction exists. If, on the totality of the evidence, there is no reasonable prospect of conviction then the Crown should not pursue the charge. Second, after considering the reasonable prospect of a conviction, the Crown considers whether there is a public interest in pursuing a criminal charge. In considering the public interest, the Crown may discontinue a matter on compassionate grounds or where an alternative enforcement regime or mechanism adequately addresses it. In considering the latter, Crown Attorneys will screen criminal negligence charges arising from a workplace accident by considering the circumstances giving rise to the charge, the potential regulatory sanctions, and the need for the use of the criminal law. If the Crown determines that the matter is adequately addressed through regulatory legislation, it may withdraw a criminal charge on the basis that pursuing a conviction is not in the public interest.

The Response of Organized Labour: More Criminal Prosecutions Demanded

The restrained approach of police and Crown prosecutors stands in stark contrast to the calls from organized labour for more liberal use of the criminal negligence provisions against corporations and management. Organized labour’s activism on this issue is not new. They were involved in lobbying the federal government for changes to the Criminal Code following Westray and have been campaigning for broader use of the criminal negligence provisions for some time under the moniker “Kill a Worker, Go to Jail”.

Organized labour has repeatedly pressed for criminal prosecutions following serious workplace accidents. Notably, in 2006, the Quebec Federation of Labour demanded that criminal charges be laid in the Transpavé matter referred to above. Similarly, organized labour welcomed the criminal charges laid against Metron and three corporate officials when they were laid in October 2010.

Organized labour has not limited itself to clamouring for increased criminal negligence charges. In March 2010, dissatisfied with the enforcement response after a worker was killed in a British Columbia saw mill in 2004 (an administrative penalty of $297,000 was imposed by WorkSafeBC), the United Steelworkers of America laid a private charge (information) against Weyerhauser Company Limited alleging criminally negligence. The Crown in British Columbia had previously concluded that criminal charges should not be laid. In 2006 and 2008, the Crown considered whether there was sufficient evidence upon which to pursue criminal negligence charges against Weyerhauser. Each review determined that the evidence was not sufficient. After the information was sworn, the available evidence was assessed again by the Crown. The assessment determined that the evidence remained insufficient and, “did not provide a substantial likelihood of conviction against the company. After the private charge proceeded, as permitted by law, the Crown assumed carriage of the prosecution and directed a stay of proceedings because of its belief that there was insufficient evidence with which to obtain a conviction.

More recently, at the beginning of May 2012, the Canadian Labour Congress released a guide entitled “Death and Injury at Work, A guide to investigating corporate criminal negligence in the event of a serious injury or fatality in a workplace”. The guide, prepared to mark the twentieth anniversary of the Westray accident, is aimed at police officers.

13

Thi k h “

Legal Issues


Through a series of questions and answers, the guide comments on issues such as the Bill C-45 amendments to the Criminal Code, the role of the police, investigatory steps to be taken, and the relationship between health and safety inspectors and police.

Each of these initiatives – lobbying, writing and laying charges – demonstrate the broad and varied approach by the labour movement to press for increased criminal negligence charges against corporations and, presumably, management, where a serious injury or fatality has occurred at a workplace. With the exception of the Weyerhauser matter, it is not clear if the actions of organized labour have actually precipitated a criminal negligence charge. It does appear that organized labour’s message has resonated with one government. In May 2012, Manitoba’s Justice and Labour ministers told the Manitoba Federation of Labour that a new director of investigations had been hired whose functions included reviewing policies to ensure that criminal negligence is addressed during investigations. The Minister of Labour also indicated that she would be raising the issue of criminal negligence and workplace safety at the federal-provincial labour ministers meeting in September. It is unlikely that a discussion amongst labour ministers could affect the application of the criminal law because labour ministers do not have authority over the police or Crown prosecutors. However, such discussions may provide impetus for change – particularly

if other jurisdictions follow Manitoba’s lead by having someone specifically tasked with ensuring that criminal negligence is addressed during investigations of workplace accidents. Should it be considered at any such meeting, Metron may be seen as an example of how the Bill C-45 amendments are working as designed because the amended criminal negligence provisions facilitated a conviction against a corporation.

Clearly the labour movement sees increased criminal enforcement against corporations and senior officials as a mechanism to enhance workplace safety. Indeed, the aforementioned guide comments only on the investigation of corporate criminal negligence. It does not comment on the investigation of criminal negligence generally or against individuals. It also does not say that police ought not to pursue criminal negligence investigations against parties other than corporations. Though Bill C-45 made it easier to convict corporations of criminal negligence, it added to existing laws which, for decades, have made it a crime for any individual to show wanton and reckless disregard for the lives or safety of others. Workers have been charged criminally and under OHS laws in the past. They too have legal duties to work safely in a manner that does not endanger others. Any investigation of criminal negligence is expected to be balanced and consider the culpability of all involved in a workplace accident. In lobbying for more criminal negligence investigations and prosecutions, trade unions must be mindful

that this could have consequences for workers as well. As the circumstances in Metron show, there are often many factors involved in a serious workplace accident.

Conclusion Metron was involved in one of the worst workplace accidents in Canadian history and is the second corporate criminal negligence conviction arising from a workplace accident since Bill C-45. The sentences are the highest monetary penalties ever meted out under the OHSA and Criminal Code for a workplace accident. These facts alone would make the case notable. Yet, Metron also demonstrates how the means to prove criminal negligence against a corporation has been expanded and that the positive measures taken by a corporation can be quickly displaced by the conduct of a local manager or supervisor. Additionally, Metron has provided impetus for policy and legislative changes which are still unfolding. Ultimately, though the entire impact of the Metron case cannot be known today, what is clear is that no case in recent memory has so directly impacted the law and policy of workplace safety.

Jeremy Warning - Jeremy is a partner in the Labour and Employment Group and a member of the fi rm’s national OHS & Workers’

Compensation Practice Group. He advises the fi rm’s provincial, national and international clients on a full range of labour and

employment issues with a particular emphasis on occupational health and safety matters. He provides proactive and strategic advice

following workplace accidents and when regulators are at the door. Jeremy also represents the fi rm’s clients before the provincial and

federal courts, administrative tribunals, boards of arbitration, and in Coroner’s inquests. Jeremy is a former Ministry of Labour prosecutor

and has practiced health and safety law for more than 10 years. He is a co-author of the Annotated Occupational Health and Safety Act, a

leading Ontario text used by corporate counsel, occupational health and safety and human resource practitioners, and law fi rms. Jeremy is

listed in The Best Lawyers in Canada 2012 directory as a leading occupational health and safety lawyer. Jeremy can be contacted by e-mail at

[email protected] or by telephone at 416 643.6946

Jeremy Warning

[email protected] 643.6946

Shane D. Todd – Shane is an Associate in the Heenan Blaikie Labour and Employment Law Group and a member of the national OHS

& Workers’ Compensation Practice Group. Shane’s practice is focused on labour, employment, and occupational health and safety law

matters on behalf of employers. He provides strategic advice, opinions and representation in relation to employee hiring, discipline and

termination, union organizing, collective agreement administration, interpretation and application, grievance arbitration, human rights

and accommodation, occupational health and safety, and workplace privacy. Shane can be contacted by e-mail at [email protected] or by

telephone at 416 643.6958

Shane D. Todd

[email protected] 643.6958

Cheryl A. Edwards - Cheryl is the lead of the fi rm’s national OHS & Workers’ Compensation Practice Group. She brings a highly

focused, strategic and practical approach to workplace safety management, problems and litigation for provincial, national and

international clients of the fi rm. Cheryl has close to 25 years of experience in representing employers, constructors, supervisors and

offi cers and directors at OHS regulatory trials, complaints, inquests and appeals. She also advises and conducts litigation in labour

relations and employment matters, including grievance arbitration, employment standards, wrongful dismissal, human rights and

workers’ compensation matters. Cheryl can be contacted by e-mail at [email protected] or by telephone at 416 360.2897

Cheryl A. Edwards

[email protected]: 416 360.2897

About the authors

14

Legal Issues


The job survey is the most important part of the planning for mast climber supply. It establishes the position, confi guration, and capacity of each machine and it should identify all hazards specifi c to the job site.

This is why regulations stipulate that the job survey should be completed by a Qualifi ed person. Identifi cation of hazards, and the method(s) employed to abate them, is essential for safe installation, and its also important from a compliance standpoint.

Many contractors and owners don’t recognize mast climbers caffold, but it is a type of scaffold and therefore is subject to many scaffold regulations (e.g. planking, guardrail height, training requirements etc).

Th e Real Hazard-An Incomplele Job Survey, Part 2 of 2

15

Poor Planning, Poor inspection and Poor Training.

Planking, and the enclosed platform - A Major Issue. Who is Doing the Daily Inspection.

Can We Safely Tie it to the Structure.

By Kevin O’Shea , President, Mast Climbers [email protected]


Skyway Canada has been safely supporting its customers since 1967.

For the past 45 years, Skyway Canada has been a trusted provider of safe, cost-effective scaffold and shoring solutions across Western Canada and Ontario. Skyway is a single source solutions provider offering scaffolding, swing stage and shoring, engineering, design, erection and dismantling services; project management and control; and cost control and billing systems. Tailored management solutions can be integrated with clients’ internal systems, ensuring accuracy, effi ciency and timely reporting.

The company, which is Canadian owned and operated, has 165 full-time employees and 1,100 employees in the fi eld, with Skyway branches in Toronto, Sarnia, Thunder Bay, Edmonton, Calgary, Bonnyville, Whitecourt and Grande

Prairie. Skyway operates under the Skyhigh name in Saskatchewan and Manitoba and has branches in Saskatoon, Regina, Winnipeg, Brandon and Edmonton.

Skyway Canada was established in Toronto in 1967, in order to supply contractors and the commercial market in southern Ontario. In 1996 Skyway expanded to Sarnia, in order to better serve Ontario’s industrial market; and in 1998 the company established itself in Alberta. In 2005, Skyway acquired Skyhigh Scaffold, in order to expand its operations into Northern Ontario, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Skyhigh Scaffold had built a good reputation with the Skyhigh name and these acquisitions have provided Skyway Canada with a strong market presence from Ontario through to Alberta.

Skyway’s proprietary Track-RITE Project Control System keeps labour and equipment costs and worker productivity in plain view, on a real-time basis so expenses and project progress can be reviewed daily.

With Track-RITE, every scaffold build is uniquely identifi ed and tracked in a database, so the customer maintains complete visibility over every aspect of the project. On repeat jobs, such as annual maintenance shutdowns, Track-RITE’s data mining capacity is particularly valuable. When the next scheduled event approaches, it’s easy to go back to the data to compare previous estimates and actual, and obtain solid information with which to plan the next project.

By Terry Haunn , Vice President Business Development, [email protected]

Skyway Canada: 45 Years in Business with Solutions You Can TrustSafely Supporting Our Cutomers Since 1967

16


In Alberta, Skyway and Skyhigh are focusing on Oilsands opportunities; and in Saskatchewan, on opportunities associated with potash mine expansions. Oil-based opportunities are going to start to take off in Saskatchewan as well in the near future and Saskatchewan is going to enjoy a very robust economy for the next three to four years. In addition, the company has formed strategic alliances with a variety of other contractors, in order to provide a complete range of services to large industrial plants. Skyway combines its services with mechanical and insulation contractors in order to form a comprehensive team. Skyway’s Strategic Alliance Services bring together best-in-class organizations representing the complete breadth of industrial specialization, ensuring a true single source solution is available to customers. Safety Standards; At Skyway, safety is our business and it’s demonstrated in everything we do. Our full-time Corporate Health and Safety Managers are specialists in occupational health and safety, and ensure our products and our people are in full compliance with all current standards. We employ local site health and safety coordinators whose job is to ensure that every system on every job site is safe. Our extensive and continuous Health and Safety training programs are mandatory for all employees; all Skyway employees are trained and tested annually.

As of July 31, 2012 Skyway has a Corporate TRIF of 0.54. Our Western Region currently leads the country with a TRIF for the past 12 months of 0.0.!! In addition to our people and our processes, all Skyway equipment meets Canadian safety standards and is regularly maintained in compliance with those standards. All personal safety equipment is supplied and mandatory at all Skyway sites. Skyway is ISO 9001 certifi ed.

Industrial Sector Solutions; Skyway’s industrial sector solutions are specifi cally tailored to the needs of every customer. With extensive industry experience across a wide variety of applications, Skyway delivers fl exible, innovative and highly effi cient systems. Our tailored management solutions, including estimating, inventory control, project management, billing and logistics processes can be integrated with our clients’ internal systems, ensuring accuracy, effi ciency and timely reporting. Responsive, customer-driven solutions make Skyway a value-added partner in industrial applications across Canada.

Commercial Sector Solutions; Skyway is the single-source solution for access, shoring and safety systems in a wide variety of commercial construction, restoration and production applications. With the most extensive inventories of the widest range of products and accessories, Skyway can engineer and supply systems expertly tailored to any job. Our full-service capabilities, including erection, on-site maintenance, teardown and cartage deliver turnkey effi ciency for any project. We’ve earned our reputation for reliability through more than 40 years of experience – experience that delivers value-added on-time, cost effective solutions.

Skyway Canada: 45 Years in Business with Solutions You Can TrustSafely Supporting Our Cutomers Since 1967

17

John Rosenthal, P.Eng. is President of Dunn-Wright Engineering Inc., in Caledon, Ontario. Rosenthal also serves as SIAC International Director. E-mail him at: [email protected]


By David H. Glabe, P.E. [email protected]

Industrial Strength Bracing

A description of proper scaff old bracing techniques for power plant boilers and similar industrial applications

When it comes to scaffold bracing, when is there

enough bracing? Certain untrained erectors, and users, assume that if the scaffold isn’t falling down, then there is enough bracing; not a very smart, practical or safe approach. And then there is the question of what type of

bracing are you talking about? Is it stability bracing, bracing that keeps the scaffold from falling over, or is it the bracing that gives a supported scaffold its’ strength? Stability bracing typically includes the connection to an adjacent structure to make sure the scaffold stays erect. Strength bracing is the bracing that is necessary to make sure the scaffold legs can support the anticipated load that will be applied to them. Strength bracing can take several forms, depending on the type of scaffold and the design chosen by the qualifi ed designer. For example, a tubular welded frame scaffold uses cross braces for bracing. A cross brace consists of two tubular or angular lengths of metal connected at the middle to form an “x”. The four ends of the brace have holes so the brace can be connected in four locations by sliding the holes over pins welded to the frame legs. This is called a pin connection. For systems scaffolds, bracing is accomplished by using a single diagonal member that is connected to adjacent legs in a vertically diagonal direction. The connection is a rigid connection rather than a pinned connection. However, the bracing effect on each accomplishes the same goal which is to make sure the scaffold leg can support the anticipated load.

A major factor in the strength of a supported scaffold leg is what engineers refer to as the “unbraced length.” A scaffold of a given diameter and material will support decreasingly smaller loads as the unbraced length of the leg gets longer. In other words, a tube 12 inches long will support a lot more load than a tube 12 feet long. When it comes to systems scaffolds, the standard unbraced length is typically 6’-6” (for systems scaffolds based on the metric system). In other words, scaffold erectors are used to installing horizontal runners every fourth connection point on the leg, resulting in an unbraced length of 6’-6”. And this is what should be done. But the bracing doesn’t end with providing a horizontal support every so often. Without some kind of additional bracing, the scaffold will simply defl ect sideways, resulting in a catastrophic collapse. This additional bracing can be either vertical diagonal bracing or other bracing that provides equivalent support, such as an adjacent scaffold or an adjacent structure. Take, for example, a power plant boiler. For those of you not familiar with a power plant boiler, picture a half gallon milk carton upside down with the “vee” shaped top now at the bottom. Picture the milk carton 175 feet high, 100 feet long and 60 feet wide. (That’s like the height of the Statue of Liberty!) Now, scaffold the interior of the milk carton using systems scaffold utilizing a 30” diameter access opening in the bottom of the milk carton. Hey, nobody said boiler scaffolds were easy to construct. When the qualifi ed designer chooses bracing for a scaffold in this situation, she can use diagonal bracing, the boiler walls, or a combination of the two to provide the required lateral support for the legs. As you can imagine, just the weight of the scaffold will exert a considerable load on each scaffold leg. In other words, the bracing is critical to the success of the design.

euaiivat

20

If vertical diagonal bracing is chosen by the designer, the design is straightforward. Typically, the diagonal bracing is installed every fourth bay (depending on the manufacturer) and in both directions. Remember, a scaffold in an upside down milk carton is three dimensional, in other words, multiple bays wide and multiple bays long. An alternative bracing scheme is to use the walls of the boiler for the bracing. This is effective when the bracing is designed properly, installed according to the design, and not tampered with by the scaffold user. This is critical since using the boiler walls effectively requires the legs to be “bumped” against the opposite walls of the boiler. In other words, a continuous line of horizontal runners must extend from wall to wall with bump tubes against the wall at each end. There is no room for error in this type of bracing since removal of a single bump tube will immediately affect the unbraced length of the scaffold leg and instantaneously decrease the capacity of the scaffold leg, possibly resulting in a catastrophic failure. (If the individual tampering with the bracing is lucky, the resulting failed scaffold will wedge against the walls of the boiler, avoiding a catastrophic collapse which would kill the misbehaving scaffold user and his fellow employees.)The bottom line here is that bracing is critical for the ability of a supported scaffold to support a load. Whether diagonal bracing is used for a systems scaffold or whether another structure is used to provide the bracing doesn’t matter as long as it is done correctly. It is up to the designer and erector of the scaffold to get it right. That is why we have standards and regulations that require that scaffolds be designed by a qualifi ed person, an individual who knows what he/she is doing. And of course, we expect the scaffold to be constructed accordingly to the design (we have a regulation for that too). And fi nally, we don’t want users messing with the scaffold (yep-there’s a regulation for that too), especially if it’s inside an upside down milk carton!

Industrial Strength Bracing


By Dean Haig, Sales Manager , EnScaf, [email protected]

ff ldO

Winter is coming and it is time to think of enclosing your scaffolding.

Over the past few years the main trend in enclosure material is the addition of fl ame retardant additives. This process insures that if a fl ame comes into contact with the fabric, it will

not burn. Most safety and enforcement offi cials are now asking for proof of “FR” in all tarps and debris netting and many require it be labeled. The additive usually changes the fabric to a milky white colour, and most manufactures print “FR” on the tarp. Scaffold sheeting systems (the ones that attach to the scaffold by bungee cords) are gaining popularity for their ease of installation and durability. These systems are generally thicker and much stronger than regular “poly” tarps which are made from woven poly material. Sheeting systems are built from two sheets of polyethylene laminated together over a layer of scrim. It’s the scrim that makes the fabric resistant to tearing, and so it lasts through the job and often can be reused.

Ease of installation is the main reason for the increase in use of scaffold sheeting. Workers can install these systems from the scaffold itself and even work with gloves on, and there is no reason to access the outside of the enclosure. The reinforcing bands give an infi nite number of attachment points for the bungees. To get a weather tight seal four inch wide tape and screw locks can be used to join the panels together. Properly installed these systems will withstand winds as high as 80 mph.

Insulated tarps have long been a mainstay of winter work. Generally they are made of a 3/16” or ¼”layer of closed cell foam sandwiched between two poly tarps. These tarps are excellent as concrete curing blankets, but as a scaffold enclosure they have all the drawbacks of poly tarps. Although some tarps are available with FR skins the

foam core is not generally FR. As well, sealing the tarps together to make the enclosure windproof is hard to do.

When there is no scaffolding, there are specially designed tarps that can be fastened to tensioned wire ropes. These

systems have special fasteners and the tarps have edge fl aps which overlap the adjacent tarp and assist in keeping out the wind.

There are lots of options when you are when you need to enclose your scaffolding, talk to your vendor, they can insure you get the best system for your application.

22

Winter Netting

THE ORIGINAL

LAYHER ALLROUND ® SCAFFOLDINGCUT COSTS, IMPROVE SAFETY, INCREASE EFFICIENCY

Watch for the neon red sticker

Trust the original

A L L R O U N D ® S C A F F O L D I N G S P E E D Y S C A F ® P R O T E C T I V E S Y S T E M S

Layher, Inc. 4847 Timber Creek Drive Houston, TX 77017 Phone +1 (713) 947 1444 Fax +1 (713) 947 1441 www.layherusa.com

Non-competing

Finance Plans

Engineering Support

Made in Germany

Re-assuring Safety

The quality of the “original”

Contact us

www.layherusa.com

THE ORIGINAL



Trust the original



Non-competing

Finance Plans

Engineering Support

Made in Germany

Re-assuring Safety


Contact us

www.layherusa.com

THE ORIGINAL



Trust the original



Non-competing

Finance Plans

Engineering Support

Made in Germany

Re-assuring Safety


Contact us

www.layherusa.com

THE ORIGINAL



Trust the original



Non-competing

Finance Plans

Engineering Support

Made in Germany

Re-assuring Safety


Contact us

www.layherusa.com

THE ORIGINAL



Trust the original



Non-competing

Finance Plans

Engineering Support

Made in Germany

Re-assuring Safety


Contact us

www.layherusa.com

THE ORIGINAL



Trust the original



Non-competing

Finance Plans

Engineering Support

Made in Germany

Re-assuring Safety


Contact us

www.layherusa.com

THE ORIGINAL



Trust the original



Non-competing

Finance Plans

Engineering Support

Made in Germany

Re-assuring Safety


Contact us

www.layherusa.com

THE ORIGINAL



Trust the original



Non-competing

Finance Plans

Engineering Support

Made in Germany

Re-assuring Safety


Contact us

www.layherusa.com

THE ORIGINAL



Trust the original



Non-competing

Finance Plans

Engineering Support

Made in Germany

Re-assuring Safety


Contact us

www.layherusa.com

THE ORIGINAL



Trust the original



Non-competing

Finance Plans

Engineering Support

Made in Germany

Re-assuring Safety


Contact us

www.layherusa.com


GÜGLINGEN-EIBENSBACH. Convincing use of the new Allround Shoring System TG 60 from Layher

for the construction of an automatic high shelf warehouse: Thanks to a sophisticated Allround Shoring system solution made by scaffolding company Postweiler Gerüstbau for a support for wide-spanning troughs, not only the high vertical loads of 9 t (8.3 metric tons) per foot could be easily transferred by standard bundling, but work levels could also be installed quickly and easily to the shoring system.

The competitive factor logistics is becoming more and more important for enterprises. Also for a leading enterprise in the polymer technology sector. The family-owned enterprise is currently building an automatic high shelf warehouse for overlong goods. One part of the building measures was, amongst others, the installation of wide-spanning concrete troughs in half-precast part construction technique. The assembly of a shoring system for the two construction phases – setting-up of the moulds for the site-mixed concrete beams and following the supporting of the troughs – represented not an “easy” challenge for the construction company “Theurer Hoch- und Tiefbau GmbH”: During the second construction phase, high vertical loads of approx. 9 tons (8.3 metric tons) per foot had to be transferred.

The scaffolding company Postweiler offered the ideal solution with a shoring system made of the Layher Allround system.

Due to the innovative Allround Shoring System TG 60, the scaffolders can combine smartly the advantages of a shoring tower made of pre-fabricated frames with those of the modular Allround Scaffolding: Quick assembly and dismantling thanks to a reduced number of components, wedge lock connection method without screws, as well as utilisation of material in the best possible way owing to variable bay lengths – at full fl exibility for diffi cult building geometries. The use of Allround standard parts moreover renders time-consuming bracings with tubes and couplers or the calibration of individual towers according to planning standards obsolete. Rectangularity is automatically granted. An excellent new product: On the Spanish construction trade fair Construmat, the Allround Shoring System TG 60 received an award for innovation.

Due to the high vertical loads in the second construction phase, the scaffolding company chose for the shoring towers of the three 198 ft (60 m) long supporting structures a ground-plan of 3’7” (1.09 m) x 3’7” (1.09 m) including a fourfold bundling of frames on the front end by means of twin wedge couplers. Thus the load bearing capacity for load concentration can be increased at will. The widening at the base of the approx.. 15 ft (4.5 m) high shoring structures was made with Allround standard parts without any problems. The assembly of a work level for the formwork and concreting works during the fi rst construction phase could also be solved elegantly with standard parts like the 2’5” (0.73 m) wide Allround consoles.

Heavy Loads Mastered Easily - with Layher

By Frank Frietsch, General Manager, Layher USA [email protected] Release

Optimum material use due to fl exible bay lengths: The Allround Shoring Tower TG 60 by Layher can be adapted fl exibly to the existing loads and the grid dimensions of the formwork beams. Assembly time is minimized.

Quick assembly thanks to few and lightweight standard components as well as well thought-out connection method: The Allround Shoring System TG 60 to set up the moulds for site-mixed concrete beams and the subsequent supporting of wide-spanning troughs. The scaffolders realized the work level elegantly by using 2’5” (0.73 m) wide Allround consoles.


As in the planning both construction phases were already taken into consideration, during the conversion from phase 1 into phase 2 the scaffolders merely had to change the head of the tower, but not the main structure of the shoring towers. After the setting of the beams, they removed the formwork as well as the components of the work level and consequently extended the shoring towers simply with a TG 60 spacer frame. Another feature: Thanks to the intelligent assembly sequence of the Allround Shoring Towers TG 60, the scaffolders had an automatic circumferential lateral protection during the assembly, even without additional parts like the advance guardrail system. This increased the work safety – and the assembly speed.

Convincing use of the new Layher Allround Shoring System TG 60: For the support for wide-spanning troughs, the high vertical loads of 9 t (8.3 metric t) per foot could be transferred easily by bundling of standards. A successful premiere for Theurer site manager Georg Burkhardt: “Gerüstbau Postweiler has created a very compact shoring system solution for us with the Layher Allround system, in spite of the very high loads. We were convinced not only by the fast assembly and dismantling, in which the scaffolders experience with the Allround system also played an important role, but also the high fl exibility thanks to the extensive product range. Thus special requests could be put into practice on-site without any problems. A system with future”, says Burkhardt.

Innovation Award for the Layher AllroundShoring System TG 60

On the Construmat 2011 – the leading construction trade fair in Spain – the award for “Innovative Technologies” in the construction equipment sector was awarded to the new Layher Allround Shoring System TG 60. Special emphasis was put on the safest possible installation, besides the economic assembly. The innovative assembly sequence offers scaffolders always a circumferential lateral protection, even without any additional components like an advance guardrail. The use of standard decks as temporary or permanent work levels during the assembly respectively the use, as well as integrated access offer additional comfort.

High safety: The innovative assembly sequence offers scaffolders always a circumferential lateral protection, even without any additional components like an advance guardrail. Wilhelm Layher GmbH & Co. KG is the largest manufacturer of scaffolding systems. What began in 1945 with the production of agricultural implements made of wood has developed into a future-oriented and innovative company. Customers around the world rely on the complete range of practical scaffolding, protection and event systems, rolling towers and ladders, as well as the comprehensive service package. With integrated solutions, Layher makes “more possible”. More than 1,200 highly qualifi ed and dedicated employees also ensure this – whether at the highly automated headquarters in Güglingen-Eibensbach or in the more than 30 subsidiaries worldwide.

For further information on the company and on the versatile scaffolding systems made by Layher, visit www.layher.com.

25

Heavy Loads Mastered Easily - with Layher


IN ORDER TO WORK ON ANY UBC SITE, MEMBERS MUST HAVE A SCAFFOLDING CERTIFICATE FROM A RECOGNIZED TRAINING PROGRAM.

Effective September 1st, 2012, all Scaffolding training under the Atlantic Canada Regional Council will be an 11 week program which will consist of:- Scaffolding (8 weeks)- Rigging (1 week)- Safety (1 week)- Forklift / Aerial Lifts (1 week)In order to receive an upgrade in wage scale, members must provide verifi cation of Scaffolding hours worked since they completed their Scaffolding training. This documentation must be written on the company’s letterhead, signed by authorized personnel.

NOTE: Journeyperson status will not be granted based upon hours. Members must complete the Journeyperson Certifi cation* SCAFFOLDER LEVEL REQUIREMENT FOR UPGRADE ROGRESS TOApprentice 2 2000 hours Apprentice 3Apprentice 3 2000 hours Journeyperson (Eligibility)

A total of 4000 Scaffolding hours with a UBC contractor is required to be eligible to challenge the Journeyperson Certifi cation* JOURNEYPERSON CERTIFICATIONUpon approval of documented hours, the member will be eligible to challenge the Journeyperson Certifi cation which consists of:- Written examination (3 hours)- Practical project (3 days)

A 70% pass mark on both theory and practical is required before Journeyperson status is granted. Journeyperson tickets will be issued with a 3 year expiry. Upon expiry, members will be required to contact their Local for renewal, and provide an update on work hours since certifi cation.

Rewrite PolicyIf the member is unsuccessful in the practical project, they will be required provide documentation of an additional 1000 scaffolding hours (with a UBC contractor) before the 2nd attempt is granted.

If the member is unsuccessful in the theory exam, a second attempt will be granted after 30 days.

GRANDFATHER CLAUSEMembers who are currently classifi ed as Journeypersons will retain their status when the Scaffolder Upgrade Policy takes effect. This means:• They will have already accumulated 4000 plus hours (UBC only) in SCAFFOLDING and will already be

recognized as a journeyperson by their UBC local on or before September 1, 2012.• They will not be required to challenge the Journeyperson Certifi cation.• They may apply for a card to designate them as journeyperson scaffolder. o A letter of recommendation from a UBC employer, stating applicant is competent as a journeyperson may apply.

o $10 admin fee.

Scaff older Upgrade Policy, Eff ective September 1, 2012

By Matthew Sancton, General, Sancton Access Inc. [email protected]


Contact your local training centre to be scheduled for the Journeyperson Certifi cation

8 WEEK SCAFFOLDING PROGRAMRationale:It has been determined by industry and union placement services, that there is a need for greater consistency among scaffold training providers within the Atlantic Canada Regional Council of Carpenters Millwrights and Allied Workers. To fulfi ll industry’s growing need for skilled workers and promote mobility, the Atlantic Canada Regional Council has adopted an eight (8) week scaffolding program which will provide the necessary skills to members who wish to successfully enter the workforce as professional scaffolders.

Program Description:This program has been designed to reduce the risk of injury and accidents to personnel involved in the construction industry and for the protection of persons and property in close proximity to construction sites. It will provide learners with the skills and knowledge required to safely erect, inspect and dismantle scaffolding equipment in accordance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act and Regulations, manufacturers recommendations and accepted safe work practices. It involves Trade Mathematics, Tool Fundamentals, Frame, Tube/Clamp and Systems Scaffolding and other related equipment and materials. Participants must have a tolerance to heights and related psychomotor dexterity as well as the essential skills required to read and interpret written and verbal instructions.

Note: The pre-requisite safety training in NOT included in the eight week program. An addition three weeks is normally scheduled to complete the required safety courses.

Pre-requisites:• Fall Protection• Rigging• First Aid• Powerline Hazards• WHMIS Confi ned Space Aerial Lifts• Confi ned Space• Aerial Lifts• Fork Lifts

27


NEWFOUNDLAND Carpenters Millwrights College, 89 McNamara Drive, Paradise, NL Phone (790)364-5586

Email: [email protected]

NEW BRUNSWICK Carpenters Training Centre of New Brunswick, 120 Ashburn Rd., P.O. Box 2181, Saint John, NB, E2L 3V1 Phone (790)364-5586


NOVA SCOTIA-CAPE BRETON24 Cossitt Heights Drive,

Sydney, NS Phone (902) 562-5130


NOVA SCOTIA-HALIFAX Carpenters Millwrights Trades College, 1000 Sackville Drive, Lower Sackville, NL Phone (902) 454-5100



Objectives: Upon successful completion of this course, participants will have developed an appreciation fot the importance of quality scaffold training and be able to:

• Identify common causes of scaffold accidents.• Defi ne and use scaffolding terminology.• Identify types of scaffolds and scaffolding equipment and explain their designed application.• Calculate safe working loads.• Identify, interpret and apply the Occupational Health and Safety Act and Regulations regarding

scaffolding and scaffolding equipment. • Select and wear appropriate PPE.• Determine foundation requirements for scaffolds.• Install mud sills.• Select and install base plates or screw jacks.• Erect tube and clamp scaffolds (square, level and plumb). • Erect system scaffolds (square, level and plumb).• Erect frames scaffolds (square, level and plumb).• Select and install bracing.• Construct stair towers using frame and system scaffolds• Frame ladder cages using tube and clamp scaffold components. Install stairs and ladders for access

egress.• Construct and install bridging • Construct cantilevers. • Construct drop scaffolds.• Layout scaffolds for use in and around vessels (tanks). • Construct ramps using scaffolding components,• Select and install decking, guardrails and toeboards. • Identify and demonstrate tie-in procedures.• Tie knots for the safe hoisting and lowering of scaffold components. • Install gin wheels.• Calculate the amount of counter weight required for various swing stage applications.

Course Units:

SP 1300 -Tube and Clamp Scaffolds (2 wks.)SP 1400- System Scaffolds (2 wks.)SP 1500- Frame Scaffolds (1 wks.)SP 2000- Advanced Scaffolds (2 wks.)SP 2100- Area Scaffolds (1 wks.)


28

COLD WEATHER PERFORMANCE

An enclosed jobsite can reduce heat needs and fuel consumption, increase the speed of work, and provide a warm work environment for staff. For example, using insulated blankets to enclose a building can reduce fuel consumption by up to 50%. A warm and properly enclosed building is a must when working in the winter, to ensure an efficient and cost effective job site.

The cold weather will once again be upon us which can mean reduced productivity and subsequent increase in costs for jobsites across Canada. Working and building in the wide range of Canadian temperatures can be challenging for many companies, especially in the winter. Since the winter season is the longest season in Canada, the majority of construction work takes place during cold weather months.

Enclose your jobsite for optimal performance in the cold weather months

NorsemanTM cold weather enclosure solutions

Interlocking hoarding tarps

Scaffold sheeting

Polyethylene construction tarps

Insulated blankets

Alberta Carpenters Training Centre

We’ve trained North America’s best scaffolders for 15 years.

The Alberta Carpenters Training Centre has delivered its 3-year Scaffolder Apprenticeship and Carpenter JM Upgrade Scaffold Programs, as well as dozens of other safety and skill training programs, to thousands of students in three training centres – Edmonton, Ft. McMurray & Calgary – since 1994.

Our new $23 million centre includes two state-of-the-art scaffold shops, including one purpose-built to accommodate suspended scaffolding.

ACTC-trained scaffolders work on some of the world’s largest mega-projects. Many of the scaffolds they design and build are unique, highly-complicated, and critical to both human safety and worker productivity.

www.abcarptc.ab.ca

P R O P R I ETA RY • PAT E N T E D • P R OV E N

Mills Construction Products is dedicated

to consistently providing technologically

advanced scaffold and shoring systems

of aluminum and steel. All of which are

user-friendly, safe, rugged, efficient and

of the highest quality.ww

w.m

ills-

scaf

fold

.com

13904 Hurontario Street, Caledon, Ontario, Canada L7C 2B8 tel: (905) 451-9471 fax: (905) 838-4059

MILLS CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS INC.


Rooftop Rigging Innovation

By Rick McKinlay, Sales & Marketing Manager, WINSAFE Corp., [email protected]

The late Steve Jobs was once quoted as saying, “Innovation distinguishes between a leader and a follower”. The items described below represent a couple of recent innovations that have been developed in partnership with some of the great scaffolding supply companies in the market, to creatively help them solve a problem and satisfy a need. Quite often, these needs and challenges manifest themselves into an idea, which with a little kneading, shaping and massaging can turn into a new product introduction. Oftentimes, these new products have the potential to also benefit others in the industry who may encounter similar challenges or face similar needs.

Outrigger Davit

The Outrigger Davit was developed for those cases in which rigging is needed to clear a tall parapet wall or other obstacle. Perhaps there is a feature raised above the rooftop surface, such as a penthouse wall face, decorative façade, or a sign that needs to be accessed.

The conventional approach in these situations is to use either conventional scaffolding or tall stands to elevate the rooftop outrigger beams.

Some of the challenges associated with this are the amount of additional equipment that is needed to be lugged up to the rooftop (materials & labour), as well as the difficulty in dealing with rear beam counterweights for an outrigger beam that is 5, 6, 7 or more feet off of the rooftop surface.

With a pivoting mast, the Outrigger Davit can be set up and rigged from rooftop level. Once in position, the mast and boom are tilted up and locked into place. Suspension wire rope can then be lowered over the edge, completing the installation (conventional counterweight and tie-back requirements apply).

The Outrigger Davit can clear an 8 ft parapet and provide up to 4 ft of reach. It is built as an add-on to modular outrigger beam components that you already have. Counterweights remain at a more manageable rooftop level, as they would with a conventional basic outrigger beam.

It’s a pretty simple installation, with a minimal amount of equipment.

Photo courtesy of Canada Scaffold Supply (Richmond, BC) Photo courtesy of AGF Access, London Branch (London, ON)

31

CCHALLENGING APPLICATIONSCCHALLENGING APPLICATIONS

IINNOVATIVE SOLUTIONSIINNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS

9905 -- 4474 -- 99340

[email protected]

WWWW.WINSAFE.COM

WWINSAFEWWINSAFE

WWinsafe is an innovative manufacturer of engineered aaccess & fall protection products & solutions for people

wwho work at height & in hard to reach locations. WWe specialize in temporary, permanently installed &

ccustom designed equipment.

SSuspended Scaffolding

OOutrigger Beams, Rigging & Suspension Systems

LLarge area Work Platforms

BBuilding Maintenance & Restoration

WWindow Washing

IIndustrial Access

CConfined Space FFall Protection

WINSAFE www.winsafe.com

DON FRY SCAFFOLD SERVICE INC www. donfryscaffold.ca

KLIMER MANUFACTURING INC. www.klimer.com

ALBERTA CARPENTERS TRAINING CENTRE www.abcarptc.ab.ca

NORSEMAN www.norseman.ca

SCAFOM CANADA www.scafom.ca

LAYHER, INC www.layherusa.com

ENSCAF www..enscaf.com

CARPENTERS’ DISTRICT COUNCIL OF ON. www.carpenterscd.com

MILLS CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS INC. www.breckscaffold.com

TRACTEL SWINGSTAGE www.tractel.com

SKYWAY CANADA www.skycan.ca

ETOBICOKE IRONWORKS LTD. www.eiw.ca

List of Advertisers

AGF ACCESS 1281 Speers Road, Oakville, Ontario, Canada T. (905) 825-0544 F. (905) 825-2801

www.agfaccess.com Contact: Steve Bird

AMETALTECH-OMEGA INC. 1735 Elzear Blvd. West, Laval Quebec, Canada. H7L 3N6 T. (450) 681 6440 F. (450) 681-5318 www.metaltechna.com Contact: Patrice Beland

SIAC NEW MEMBERS

On August 22nd 2012, the SIAC held its 5th Annual Harold K. Forbes Golf Tournament at the Diamond Back course in Richmond Hill. On a day that can only be described as “perfect golfi ng conditions” our participants teed off at noon to battle for the coveted Trophy. Thanks to our members and their guests, our sponsors, volunteers, organizing committee and of course Club Link, Diamond Back, we had a great day out. It is tough to improve year on year, but, suffi ce to say, this was one of the best!

Some great scores were posted this year and once again the Trophy changed hands. Congratulations to our winners;Gary Carew, Michael Carew, Ian Morton and Paul Chaisson.

Our prize winners were; Closest to the Pin, Neil Walters, Longest Drive, Scott Morrison and Putting Contest, Bob Poirier. Once the golfi ng activities were complete, we enjoyed a fi rst class dinner and awards ceremony where our winners were presented with their trophies and prizes. James Dean was the winner of the grand raffl e prize of a Golfi ng Weekend for 4 in Muskoka. Finally, it was a pleasure to have Harold Forbes son Len and other family members at the Tournament. We hope to see everyone back at the Tournament in 2013!

HKF 5th Annual Golf Tournament

John O’Hara, President of SIAC Presenting 5th HKF Golf Tournament Prizes 33

Chris Earnshaw, [email protected]

19 Delta Park Blvd.Brampton, Ontario Canada L6T 5E7

www.scafom.ca

QualityIt is quality in the design and the materials used that distinguishes Ringscaff®. Quality is also in the advice and involvement of experienced staff at Scafom.

Efficiency was key in the development and production of Ringscaff® Modular System Scaffold. Features such as weight reduction, speed of erection and dismantling all con-tribute to a high degree of efficiency.

At Scafom safety is our number one priority, from development to manufacturing and the actual construction and use of the scaffold.

Ringscaff®

2131 121 Avenue

Access Canada Magazine October 2012

Documents

Transcript of Access Canada Magazine October 2012