R. Williams Construction Co. V. Oshrc

As you are aware, the decision by the Court of the Barton v. Rona case (2012 ONSC 3809) recognized that although Mr. Barton’s misconduct was serious, his specific acts of misconduct were not severe enough to warrant his dismissal. The Court felt that in this situation, a stern warning to him never again to permit a safety violation by an employee would have been sufficient (p.13, para. 55). This was particularly the case, based on your investigation you have performed on April 24, 2009, given that nothing in his excellent work record and no prior infractions suggested that he would not be amenable to such discipline (p.10, para. 40) or that he would repeat such misconduct in the future (p.9, para. 38). Given that the Court could not find that his misconduct met the threshold of striking at the heart of the employment relationship (p.14, para. 55), it concluded that Rona had breached Mr. Barton’s employment contract, and Mr. Barton was entitled to damages as a result (p.14, para. 56).

* Within such an environment it would be difficult to ensure the safety of the company employees.

The second accident at the "Timken Steel Faircrest plant" company which a is an employee fall down more than 40 feet which led to several broken bones because of just a small mistake. The problem is when he made a maintenance on a crane he wasn't ware Certified safety harness which it could safe his live from the risk. I used to do a maintenance on more than one cran and my company doesn't allow me to go without waring a Certified safety harness because they have to keep all the employees a way from all the risk and even if they didn't told me to ware it, I will not go up to the cran without it, do the fact that no one knows what will happen and even if I am good at this job, I have to work safely. I agree that this company should teach all

From this incident was any employee disciplined for not following safety procedures. This would establish if the company believes the employees were negligent in their duty.

Unit 4 Discussion 7/25/2015 6:43:17 PM I believe that OSHA is a very beneficial and important part of the medical facilities. The law and regulations were thought up and enforced in the beginning for a reason, so we should keep abiding by them. The laws are strict and probably difficult to follow at all times, but it is for the

In addition, Williams violated 29 C.F.R. § 1926.651(k) (1) for failing to designate a “competent person” with sufficient training and knowledge to identify and correct existing and predictable hazards (www.dol.gov). No supervisor at the Company was familiar with the basic standards applicable to the worksite or otherwise “capable of identifying and correcting existing and predictable hazards in their surroundings.” The court disagreed that the Company discharged its OSHA duties merely by relying on the general work experience of Dzamba and J.P. Williams or “common sense.”

As the fire started, people were taking the stairs as a way out. People were falling on one another because “there were no lights in the stairway, so they had to grope their way in darkness.” (par. 6) Obviously, worker safety was not a priority because the labor was easily replaced. However, the building was not. After the fire, the fire chief found it to be “in good shape; so were the floors. It had passed the test. It was fireproof.” (par. 14) So much effort was put into making a building last, yet barely any effort was put into protecting worker lives in case of an accident because they were worth little to those who hired

The human resources process has to accompany both the employee and employer in regard to safety issues. An employee wants the assurance of safe and healthy working conditions; anything less exposes danger to their own wellbeing. In addition employees must take heed to precautions design by the organization. However an employer wants to avoid expenditures in overhead by cutting cost or corners often putting their employees at harmful risk. In addition, organizations also have a lawful obligation in which they have to provide a safe workplace by preventing accidents, hazards, serious injuries or accident-related deaths. Negligence on either behalf can result in determination, fines, citations, work-related

During interviews that were conducted during the investigation, it became evident that a lot of employees are no understanding of the OSHA regulations and had received no training on trench safety. The second violation states that Williams did not ensure that their employees did not have to travel more than twenty-five feet to a safe zone. The trench that the employees were working was more than forty-five feet long and only had one exit. At the time of the collapse the employees in question were deep into the trench trying to clean out the water pumps that were in place. This causes a hazard for them because they were unable to reach safety or escape once the walls collapsed. The third violation stated the there was no “competent person” on the job that had extensive knowledge of trench safety. It is regulation by OSHA to have at least one person on cite that is able to spot existing and potential hazards on the job cite. During the investigation it was clear that no employees had knowledge of OSHA or any of the regulations related to trench safety. The fourth and final violation was that Williams failed to ensure that the walls of the excavation were either sloped or supported. It was stated early in the case that the support provided by a hydraulic jack was removed the night before the collapse causes the walls and work environment to be un-stable.

All employees of Robinson’s Excavation are valued members of the organization which is why safety must always come first. The construction industry is traditionally a hazardous work environment, but with vigilance, dedication, and training, the dangers can be significantly reduced. In order to provide the employees of Robinson’s Excavation with a safe work environment, all employees, regardless of status, are required to follow and enforce all safety procedures, which are not all inclusive. Additionally, the following protocol is in compliance with all state and federal OHSA regulations.

In 2008, Lowe’s Companies, Inc. have failed to ensure a sustainable safety environment, put in place a health program, and maintain adequate record keeping on work-related injury and illnesses claims for certain locations in the state of Ohio. This employer has been made aware of OSHA requirements for its industry and has been cited many times for similar infractions. OSHA regulators have imposed stiff penalty fines that have cost Lowe’s Companies Inc. thousands of dollars. The record-keeping violations at the

The Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA), often referred to as the "OSH Act," was enacted in 1970 by President Richard M. Nixon. Its purpose is to assure safe and healthful working conditions for men and women (EPA, 2006). The Act is administered and enforced at the national level by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, a division of the US Department of Labor. The application of the OSH Act in the current employment climate will be discussed as it applies to a variety of industries; considerations that are most applicable to the specific type of industry will be discussed initially, and those that are equally important regardless of the type of business will complete the section. Finally, this paper will discuss how the

According to the Bureau of Labor, statistics indicate that more than 4.1 million people were hurt or injured on-the-job in 2006 and 5,488 were killed in 2007 (Gomez-Mejia, Balkin, & Cardy, 2010, p. 511). Laws and regulatory requirements are currently in place to standardize and promote workplace safety. Organizations with extensive safety programs have reduced number of accidents, decreased workers’ compensation claims and lawsuits and lesser accident-related expenditures (Gomez-Mejia, et al, 2010, p. 511). This paper discusses the effects of legal, safety and regulatory requirements in

It took many years for the commissions and unions to get the changes implemented. Today, regardless of OSHA enforcement, there are still workplaces with locked or blocked emergency exits. Due to the lesson that was learned in the Triangle fire, we now have organizations like OSHA, NFPA, state and local municipals that make code and enforce standards. Their goal is to ensure the safety of lives and property by enforcing the codes and standards of all workplaces

The employer also has to comply with all standards, rules, and regulations that are set forth by OSHA and the OSH Act. Employers are required to inspect the workplace to insure they are up to OSHA standards. Insure that employees are only using safe tools and equipment that are in their proper condition. It should be easy for the employees to be aware of potential hazards by the employer posting signs, using color codes, labels, or signs to convey warning. Employees must be trained in a language that they understand. Operating procedures must be in place and properly communicated to the employees to assure the employees follow safety and health standards. Employers that house or use hazardous chemicals will be required to have hazardous communication program and for that all the employees to be trained on exposure and precautions. Employers are to fund medical exams if required by OSHA standards. The OSHA poster must placed in a prominent location at the workplace. Records need to be kept of work-related injuries and illnesses. The log of these injuries and illnesses need to made available on February 1st for three months. Assure employees have access to medical and exposure records. Provide a workplace free of discrimination. OSHA citations must be posted at or near the work area where the infraction occurred. The citation must be in place for three working days or until the