Report from the government of Ontario’s ‘Newsroom’
A worker, employed by Janco Steel Ltd. of Stoney Creek, Ontario, a steel processing company, was fatally struck by a large industrial forklift. The company failed to ensure that the measures and procedures prescribed by section 56 of Ontario Regulation 851, as amended, were carried out, contrary to section 25(1)(c) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
On the day of the incident, a worker employed by Janco Steel Ltd. was fatally struck by an industrial forklift being operated inside the plant. The worker was operating an overhead crane, offloading a large steel coil from a transport truck to a weight scale.
While performing the task and looking up at the load, the worker walked backwards into an interior driveway where a large industrial forklift was travelling. The operator of the forklift did not see the worker and could not see the area immediately in front of the coil being moved by the worker. The forklift operator was driving 2-3 kilometers per hour and immediately stopped the forklift when another worker yelled, but the forklift had already fatally struck the operator of the overhead crane.
An investigation by the Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development found that the company failed, as an employer, to ensure that the operation of the Taylor Forklift, model X650L, was directed by a signaller when its operator did not have a full view of the intended path of travel.
Following a guilty plea in Provincial Offences Court, Hamilton, Janco Steel Ltd. was fined $200,000 by Justice of the Peace S. Butany-Goyal; Crown Counsel was Steven Succi.
The court also imposed a 25 per cent victim fine surcharge as required by the Provincial Offences Act. The surcharge is credited to a special provincial government fund to assist victims of crime.
My opinion
The law(s) in contravention:
Janco Steel Ltd., was found guilty of a contravention of the Ontario ‘Industrial Establishments’ sector regulation 851/90, section 56 which states,
“Where the operator of a vehicle, mobile equipment, crane or similar material handling equipment does not have a full view of the intended path of travel of the vehicle, mobile equipment, crane or similar material handling equipment or its load, the vehicle, mobile equipment, crane or similar material handling equipment shall only be operated as directed by a signaller who is a competent person and who is stationed,
(a) in full view of the operator;
(b) with a full view of the intended path of travel of the vehicle, mobile equipment, crane or similar material handling equipment and its load; and
(c) clear of the intended path of travel of the vehicle, mobile equipment, crane or similar material handling equipment and its load.”
This is contrary to the OHSA, section 25, subsection 1(c) which states,
“An employer shall ensure that,
(c) the measures and procedures prescribed are carried out in the workplace.”
There were a few questions that should have been asked and answered here.
- Where was the supervisor in all this?
- Was the operator not aware that a signaller was necessary if the intended path of travel is obstructed?
- Was the training current and met the “Competency” standards as listed in the Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA)? And
- I wonder if the company knew that, possibly, an overhead crane can be locked and tagged out when other lifting devices, such as Elevating Work Platforms (EWPs), are in the general area.
As always, many questions, and no answers.
HRS Group Inc. has a great team that can help you with all your health and safety needs including ‘Forklift Certification’ and ‘Forklift Re-Certification’.
Contact Deborah toll free at 1-877-907-7744 or locally at 705-749-1259.
Ensure your workplace is a safe place.
Remember – In Ontario, “ALL Accidents are Preventable”
‘Work’ and ‘Play’ safe.
Daniel L. Beal
CHSEP – Advanced Level
CEO & Senior Trainer
HRS Group Inc.