Posts Categorized As: Construction

Blog Post #1702 – Workplace Fatality Results in $115,000 Fine for Ottawa-based Company

Report from the government of Ontario’s ‘Newsroom’

A worker, employed by Ottawa Pavemaster, of Ottawa, Ontario, a construction company that performs asphalt paving, was fatally injured by a truck that was backing up. The company failed to ensure the driver of the truck was assisted by a signaller contrary to Section 104(3) of Ontario Regulation 213/91, an offence under Section 66(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act. Section 25(1)(c) of the Act states that “an employer shall ensure, that the measures and procedures prescribed are carried out in the workplace.”

Continue Reading

Blog Post #1698 – Quebec-based Construction Company Fined $65,000 After Worker Injury

Report from the government of Ontario’s ‘Newsroom’

A worker, employed by Bellai Alliance Floor Finishing Ltd. of Gatineau, Quebec (formerly Bellai Bros. Construction), was injured by a swinging peri box that was rigged to a tower crane. Bellai Alliance Floor Finishing Ltd. failed to ensure that the measures and procedures required by section 179(1) of Ontario Regulation 213/91 were carried out at the workplace, contrary to section 25(1)(c) of the Ontario Health and Safety Act.

Continue Reading

Blog Post #1694 – Toronto Construction Company and Two Supervisors Fined $625,000 Total After Worker Fatality

Report from the government of Ontario’s ‘Newsroom’

A worker, employed by Limen Group Construction of Toronto, Ontario, was fatally injured by a falling concrete block. The company failed, as an employer, to ensure that the measures and procedures prescribed by section 172(1) of Ontario Regulation 213 were carried out at a workplace, contrary to section 25(1)(c) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act. It also failed to take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances for the protection of a worker, contrary to section 25(2)(h) of the Act. The two supervisors failed to take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances for the protection of a worker, contrary to section 27(2)(c) of the Act.

Continue Reading