Safety changes ‘will kill’: union leader
Minister defends proposed new rules that Agricultural Union is fighting
Proposed changes to a federal labour law governing worker safety are diluting a good system for no reason and will “kill people,” a national labour union official charged Wednesday.
The comments from Agricultural Union president Bob Kingston were part of a blistering attack on labour law changes embedded in the federal government’s omnibus budget Bill C-4.
However federal Labour Minister Kellie Leitch and her office are strenuously contesting the union’s interpretation of the changes, and insist they are meant only to streamline an overburdened system.
Kingston told reporters that the bill gives the minister legal right to dismiss any safety complaint that results in a worker refusing to work and to do so without any investigation. That perceived reduction in oversight is frightening, he said.
“I don’t believe parliamentarians understand what’s in this bill,” Kingston said, “and I don’t blame the minister. I think she has been seriously misled by some of her staff. I don’t think she’s aware of some of these changes. If this goes through, it is going to kill people. It’s as simple as that.”
Under the current safety rules, when an employer and employee disagree about the safety of a task, a health and safety officer must investigate.
The changes in C-4 would allow the health and safety officers to dismiss a worker’s complaint without conducting a full investigation.
They would also change the definition of what constitutes a danger — from defining it as a potential hazard to calling it an imminent or serious threat.
In a statement Wednesday, Leitch said the health and safety of Canadian workers is her “No. 1 priority.”
“The proposed amendments to Canada’s Labour Code are about streamlining processes to achieve better health and safety outcomes for businesses, workers and all Canadians,” she said. “Over a 10-year period, 2000 to 2010, more than 80 per cent of the refusals to work have been determined to be situations of no danger, even after allowing appeals. These requests have put a strain on resources and have prevented a higher number of proactive interventions by health and safety officers.”
A spokeswoman later stressed that the right to refuse dangerous work has not changed, and that, despite the union’s contention, it will be the health and safety officers, not the minister, making determinations about safety issues.
“If there’s a disagreement between the parties, Health and Safety Officers will have delegated authorities under the Code, and will render decisions upon the review of reports from the employer and the health and safety committee (comprised of employees (unions) and employer representatives), or they may choose to investigate further. This strengthens the internal responsibility process and is a fair and balanced process for workplace parties.”
The union leader said the changes were proposed without any consultation with stakeholders, and he speculated that the government is attempting to cut corners because it has cut the number of its safety inspectors nationwide from 125 to 80.
“There has been absolutely zero dialogue on this,” he said. “It was done in secret among senior managers in that department. What problem this bill is intended to address is a mystery. No employer has ever called for these changes or even raised them for discussion.”
Kingston was backed at a Parliament Hill news conference Wednesday by Rob Ellis, whose 18-year-old son, David, was killed on his second day working at an Oakville bakery in 1999.
Ellis founded MySafeWork, an organization dedicated to workplace safety in partnership with several unions, corporations and large businesses including Loblaw, DuPont, Hydro One and Shell.
David Ellis was pulled into a large industrial mixer that had no safety guard.
“Since the loss of David,” said Ellis, “Canadian leaders in government, unions and corporations have worked hard to transfer workplace knowledge to parents, students, new workers and immigrant workers. In our nation, we have the right to say no to unsafe work. Bill C-4 weakens the right to refuse unsafe work. I fear my David’s story will become more common if these changes become law.
“How would your sons and daughters know if there was an imminent danger if they lack experience in their new workplace?” he added. “Will your sons or daughters have the courage to report any unsafe work conditions if they fear for their jobs? With the stroke of a pen, Bill C-4 will miraculously turn dangerous workplaces into ones considered to be safe.”
The government’s 80 per cent claim is “nonsensical and would have come out if they had bothered to consult anybody,” said Kingston, who will appear with other union officials before the House of Commons Human Resources Committee Thursday to call for the proposed changes to be scrapped.