4.1 Introduction to Hazard Recognition, Assessment and Control
The key to preventing workplace injuries and fatalities is to identify hazards and control them, otherwise known as Hazard Recognition, Assessment and Control (HRAC). This chapter examines how workers and employers identify, prioritize, and control workplace hazards. A workplace hazard is anything that might harm, damage, or adversely affect any person or thing under certain conditions at work. It can be an object, process, context, person, or set of circumstances which has the potential to create injury or ill health. While this definition may seem vague, it is intentionally vague in order to ensure that anything that could potentially harm a worker is included.
Hazard recognition (which is sometimes called hazard identification) is the systematic task of identifying all hazards present, or potentially present, in a workplace. It is the first step of any HRAC process. The second step is hazard assessment (which is sometimes called hazard analysis). In a hazard assessment, workers and employers determine which of the hazards needs to be addressed most urgently. Finally, the hazard control process sees preventive and corrective measures implemented to eliminate or mitigate the effect of the hazard(s). Let’s review a mobile workplace incident to see how hazard recognition, assessment and control measures may have prevented such a tragedy.
Story: Interlake Paving in Stony Mountain
On July 25, 2008, 15-year-old Andrew James was working as a labourer for Interlake Paving in Stony Mountain, Manitoba. Interlake, a small company owned by Gerald Shepell, had been contracted to pave a parking lot. James was standing on the box of a semi-trailer, scooping out asphalt with a shovel. The trailer gate unexpectedly swung open, shaking the truck. James lost his footing and fell into the asphalt in the trailer, which quickly poured out through the trailer gate onto the ground, burying him. James died almost immediately from the intense heat of the asphalt. Shepell tried to dig James out, sustaining severe burns to his own hands, arms, feet, and legs.[1] Shepell later pled guilty to breaches of the Workplace Safety and Health Act and the Employment Standards Code (James was under-age) and was fined $34,000.[2]
In the case of Andrew James, the process of hazard recognition, assessment and control would have identified the risks posed by the trailer’s inadequately latched gate, the unsafe unloading practices, the absence of an emergency plan, and other issues. It might also have raised questions about the adequacy of the training provided to James, the legality of his employment, and the OHS complexity of mobile workplaces—workplaces where the hazards are ever-changing.
The core purpose of HRAC is to methodically identify and control workplace hazards. Some hazards are easier to identify than others. For example, it is easy to see that an extension cord lying across a busy hallway may cause someone to trip. It is more difficult to determine if a cleaning agent is toxic or if a machine is producing too much noise. Even more challenging is identifying factors that are increasing stress among workers or are the precursors of harassment. Similarly, some hazards are also easier to control than others. Eliminating the hazard posed by the extension cord is a quick and easy fix. Other hazards may be much more expensive to control or may reflect a core aspect of the production process. Some controls may be complex, requiring multi-faceted solutions. Further complicating the HRAC process are the conflicting interests between workers and employers around hazards. Employers and workers might disagree over what constitutes a hazard, how serious the hazard is, and what the most appropriate control should be.
“Hazard Recognition, Assessment, and Control” in Health and Safety in Canadian Workplaces by Jason Foster and Bob Barneston, published by AU Press is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, unless otherwise noted.
