This article was posted 12/17/2007 and is most likely outdated.

Montreal-based company pleads guilty, fined $130,000
 

 

Topic - Safety
Subject - Montreal-based company pleads guilty, fined $130,000 for health and safety violation causing death

December 17, 2007
This newsletter was sent to 27728 newsletter subscribers

Ask a Question |  Weekly Code GraphicQuizzes |  Free Stuff InstructorsOnline Training Products | Seminars | SubscribeUnsubscribe
[ image1 Post Comments | View Comments | Notify Me When Comments Are Added ] Web Page Version [Printer-Friendly]    

Montreal-based company pleads guilty, fined $130,000
for health and safety violation causing death

 

By: Canada NewsWire

Sep 20, 2007

NAPANEE, ON (CNW) -- Riviera Inc., a St. Laurent, Quebec-based manufacturer of men's clothing, has been fined $130,000 in the Ontario Court of Justice for failing to ensure safe work procedures at its Napanee manufacturing plant.

Riviera pleaded guilty on September 19, 2007, in relation to an incident on October 17, 2005, in which a self-employed electrician was fatally injured. The electrician had been hired by Riviera to repair three defective relay switches in three locations at the plant and was found dead from electrocution at the site of the third and final repair.

Court heard the electrical circuit being repaired had not been de-energized and there was no lock-out in place to ensure the circuit remained de-energized while work was performed. Riviera, as an employer, is responsible for the health and safety of all workers,
including independent contractors.

The Ministry of Labour investigation concluded that the fatality could have been prevented had the employer taken necessary steps to ensure that the circuit had been locked out and de-energized as required by the Industrial Regulations and the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

Riviera pleaded guilty to failing, as an employer, to take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances for the protection of a worker at a workplace located at 444 Advance Ave., Napanee, contrary to section 25(2)(h) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

The fine was imposed by Justice of the Peace Donna Doelman of the Ontario Court of Justice in Napanee. In addition, the court 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.

 

 

 

Click here to post a comment
[ View More Newsletters ] [ Send to a Friend ] [ Post Comments | View Comments | Notify Me When Comments Are Added ]

Copyright © Mike Holt Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved.
This article is protected by United States copyright and other intellectual property laws and may not be
displayed or published on the internet without the prior written permission of Mike Holt Enterprises, Inc.

http://www.MikeHolt.com     1-888-NEC-CODE (1-888-632-2633)

Experiencing a Problem? Click Here

 
Comments
  • A lot of the above responses seem to blame the electrician, not the company. What happens is the electrician says, "I want to shut this circuit off" and the manager says, "You can't shut it off because it will cause [insert some inconvenience here]." Between the lines: if you don't do it, we will find somebody who will. So the guy, anxious for work, goes ahead and does it. The fine should have been much larger. ~Peter

    Peter J. Michael
  • Reply from: Dan Lawrence PE   
    Agreed ... to a point. Whether or not the company is putting that kind of pressure on the electrician (certainly immoral and unethical, and illegal in the States), the electrician is bound by his own rules of engagement, not to mention his own safety and life, to assure himself of the status of the circuit under ALL circumstances, not just SOME occasions, and only when "convenient" to the Owner/Manager. To proceed with work on a live circuit (which all electricians have done and will probably continue to do in the future, right or wrong and in spite of the laws and good, common horse sense) is rolling the dice with a one-way ticket to trouble in hand. The electrician still owns his own life, and the company is at the very least ethically and morally bound (again, legally in the States) to comply with the safety measures required of and by the electrician. No excuses, no conveniences. If the company doesn't comply, the electricians of this world need to "sack up" and have the conviction (read that, cajones) to walk away from the work in lieu of surrendering their lives. In that vein, I find no good excuse for the electrician to obviously NOT have at least checked the circuit with any of the myriad pocket voltage testers to AT LEAST have raised the CAUTION FLAG of awareness before diving into the work task. Was the fine too small? Absolutely. But, then, it appears that the valuation of a person's life has a different setpoint in different places, eh? I feel deeply for the family left to pick up the pieces and go forward. My only hope is that there is a lesson to be learned by all who read this and take heed therefore.


Reply to this comment
* Your Name:
   Your name will appear under your comments.

* Your Email:
   Your email address is not displayed.
* Comments:

This newsletter is closed to new comments.

Email Notification Options:
Notify me when a reply is posted to this comment
Notify me whenever a comment is posted to this newsletter