Canadian Safety Reporter

©2016 Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd ISBN/ISSN: 978-0-7798-2810-4 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the written permission of the publisher (Carswell, a Thomson Reuters business). Canadian Safety Reporter is part of the Canadian HR Reporter group of publications: • Canadian HR Reporter — www.hrreporter.com • Canadian Occupational Safety magazine — www.cos-mag.com • Canadian Payroll Reporter — www.payroll-reporter.com • Canadian Employment Law Today — www.employmentlawtoday.com • Canadian Labour Reporter — www.labour-reporter.com See carswell.com for information Safety Reporter Canadian www.safetyreporter.com Published 12 times a year by Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd. Subscription rate: $129 per year Customer Service Tel: (416) 609-3800 (Toronto) (800) 387-5164 (outside Toronto) Fax: (416) 298-5106 E-mail: carswell.customerrelations @thomsonreuters.com Website: www.carswell.com One Corporate Plaza 2075 Kennedy Road Toronto, Ontario, Canada M1T 3V4 Director, Carswell Media Karen Lorimer Publisher John Hobel (on leave) Associate Publisher/Managing Editor Todd Humber Lead Editor Sarah Dobson Assistant Editor Mallory Hendry (on leave) Assistant Editor Anastasiya Jogal Contributing Editors Jeffrey R. Smith Liz Foster Sabrina Nanji Liz Bernier Marketing & Audience Development Manager Robert Symes mm.ali@thomsonreuters.com (416) 609-5866 Circulation Co-ordinator Keith Fulford keith.fulford@thomsonreuters.com (416) 649-9585 Supervisors recognized worker's clothes and build CSR | January 2016 | News identified him directly. He said he didn't measure exactly how far from the edge he was, but he claimed he didn't walk on a mat that was within six feet of the edge. Dyson ultimately es- timated he was six to eight feet away from the mat. However, he had no explanation as to why two supervisors wouldn't be truthful about what they saw. Dyson also said he had re- ceived no direction from his su- pervisor on whether a form had to be filled out for the assign- ment. Another employee had been assigned to partner with Dy- son to perform measurements of ladders on various buildings that day. He said Dyson went up the ladder ahead of him and onto the roof to take measure- ments, and he claimed he only lost visual contact with Dy- son briefly when Dyson walked away from the top of the ladder. The co-worker claimed Dyson couldn't have gotten that close to the edge of the roof. The co- worker acknowledged neither of them were wearing safety har- nesses, but said they didn't need them because they weren't doing anything near the edge. They were also aware of company policy that permits were neces- sary when working at heights, but they weren't aware one was needed for the job of measur- ing ladders. The plan would be for them to be moving up and down without spending much actual time on the roof, said the co-worker. The arbitrator found that there was no question the supervisors could have iden- tified Dyson as the employee they saw on the roof. Though they didn't know him, he was identifiable with the clothing his was wearing, his hard hat, his stature, and his bearing. Once Dyson was pointed out to them — by an employee who knew immediately who they were talking about — they knew immediately that he was the one on the roof. In addition, no other employees were assigned to roof work that day, so it could only have been Dyson, said the arbitrator. No reason to doubt supervisors or investigation The arbitrator also found IOC conducted a thorough investi- gation, including two re-enact- ments and measuring to make sure the spot where Dyson was seen was less than six feet from the edge. In addition, the pose the supervisors reported seeing Dyson take — one foot in front of the other and leaning over — only made sense if Dyson was close enough to the edge of the roof to see down and feel the need to stabilize himself. The arbitrator found there was no reason for the supervi- sor to lie about seeing someone close to the edge of the roof and all evidence pointed to it being Dyson — including his own ac- knowledgement that it was he who was working on the roof that day. Taking into account Dyson's short term of service and poor discipline record, the arbitrator found IOC had just cause to terminate Dyson's em- ployment. "My considerations have found just cause to discipline (Dyson), and that the safety vio- lation complained of is a major infraction which warrants a se- vere response of its own accord," said the arbitrator. "Since Mr. Dyson's service is so short, and his discipline record is so che- quered during his tenure, and he has already been suspended for a working at heights viola- tion, he has no workplace bank account of any benefit to draw upon to mitigate his circum- stances." For more information see: • Iron Ore Co. of Canada and USW, Local 5795 (Dyson), Re, 2015 CarswellNfld 391 (N.L. Arb.). Edge< pg. 5 e investigation included an informal measurement of where the worker was seen in relation to the edge of the roof, a re-inactment of the scene with a (tethered) contractor, and interviews of Dyson and another employee who was with Dyson. WEBINARS Interested in learning more about safety and HR issues directly from the experts? Check out the Carswell Professional Development Centre's live and on-demand webinars discussing topics such as building strong safety leadership, engaging managers and supervisors to ensure OHS compliance, and building a better joint health and safety committee. Visit www.cpdcentre.ca/cos for more information.

• Cover