3.6 Summary
Fifteen-year-old Andrew James died under a pile of hot asphalt because his employer failed to identify, recognize, and control workplace hazards. While the HRAC process doesn’t guarantee that workers will never be injured on the job, it can dramatically reduce the incidence of workplace injuries and fatalities. Following the HRAC process should have changed the work processes James’s employer used and, in turn, would likely have saved James’s life despite the challenges posed by the mobile nature of the worksite.
HRAC is not immune from the conflicts inherent in the employment relationship. Employers and workers each have vested interests in the outcomes of an HRAC process. Collaboration is key to the hazard recognition, assessment and control process. Stackholders from various areas of the business need to be included in the hazard identification, assessment and control process in order to eliminate or reduce workplace incidents.
Check Your Knowledge
Discussion Questions
- What are the main steps in the HRAC process? What is the underlying goal of HRAC?
- Why is it necessary to prioritize hazards? What are the potential concerns about applying a risk analysis perspective?
- How would employers and workers perceive the relative merits of PPE versus engineering controls?
- How might looking at the location of hazard control affect the decisions made about which control is most appropriate?
- What challenges arise in hazard control for telecommuters?
Exercises
- Reread the case that opens this chapter and write 150-word answers to the following questions. Be sure to save your answers as we will return to this vignette later in the book.
- What hazards were present at the worksite?
- How would you prioritize the identified hazards?
- What controls should have been implemented?
- Write two to three paragraphs providing your opinion on the following statement:
“Some accidents are unavoidable. There is only so much we can do to control hazard”
Notes
- James, R. (2011). 15-year-old Andrew James loved his dream job. Threads of Life Newsletter. 9(4), p. 3.
- McIntyre, M. (2010, November 30). Asphalt firm fined $34K in teen’s death. Winnipeg Free Press, p. A7.
- Fenn, P., & Ashby, S. (2004). Workplace risk, establishment size and union.British Journal of Industrial Relations, 42(3), 461–480.
- Champoux, D., & Brun, J-P. (2003). Occupational health and safety management in small size enterprises: An overview of the situation and avenues for intervention and research. Safety Science, 41(4), 301–318.
- International Labour Organization. (2013). Training Package on Workplace Risk Assessment and Management for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises. Geneva: ILO.
- Eakin, J. (1992). Leaving it up to the workers: Sociological perspective on the management of health and safety in small workplaces. International Journal of Health Services, 22(4), 689–704.
- Lansdown, T., Deighan, C., & Brotherton, C. (2003). Health and safety in the small to medium-sized enterprise: Psychosocial opportunities for intervention. London: HSE Books.
- Unnikrishnan, S., Iqbal, R., Singh, A., & Nimkar, I. (2015). Safety management practices in small and medium enterprises in India. Safety and Health at Work, 6(1), 46–55.
- International Labour Organization. (2013).
- Boyd, C. (2004). Human resource management and occupational health and safety. London: Routledge.
- Gadd, S., Keeley, D., & Balmforth, H. (2004). Pitfalls in risk assessment: Examples from the U.K. Safety Science, 42, 841–857.
- Messing, K. (2014). Pain and prejudice: What science can learn about work from the people who do it. Toronto: Between the Lines.
- Adler, M. (2005). Against “individual risk”: A sympathetic critique of risk assessment. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 153(4), 1121–1250.
- Alberta Occupational Health and Safety Code, 2009, s. 2-1.
- The Vector Poll Inc. (2013). The Alberta Worksite Hazard Assessment Survey: Report to Alberta Workers’ Health Centre. Toronto: Author.
- Government of Canada, Labour Program. (1993). Labour Standards Interpretations, Policies and Guidelines 808/819-IPG 057, p. 4.
- All jurisdictions define workplace in broad enough terms that all forms of telework apply. The Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act offers a good example: “(s. 1.1) ‘workplace’ means any land, premises, location or thing at, upon, in or near which a worker works.”
- Crandell, W., & Gao, L. (2005). An update on telecommuting: Review and prospects for emerging issues. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 70(3), 30–37; Healy, M. (2000). Telecommuting: Occupational health considerations for employee health and safety. AAOHN Journal, 48(6), 305–315.
- Workers Health and Safety Centre. (1998). Occupational Health and Safety: A Training Manual (3rd ed.). Don Mills: Author.
