WorkSafe

Continental Pipeline & Facility Ltd. | $75,000 | Buckinghorse | May 1, 2015
Four of this firm’s workers were securing a load of pipeline pipes on the flat deck of a trailer. A loose pipe fell off the top of the load,
striking one of the workers, who sustained serious lower-leg injuries. WorkSafeBC’s investigation found that the firm had failed to
analyze the risks of the work activity and to put in place safe work procedures to address the hazards identified. This failure in turn
shows that the firm did not provide its workers with the instruction, training, and supervision needed to ensure their safety while
securing the pipes. These were both repeated and high-risk violations.
Daniel Hirokazu Hirai | $6,825.80 | Surrey | May 1, 2015
WorkSafeBC observed three of this firm’s workers, including a supervisor, sheathing the roof of a new townhouse. No fall protection
system was in place. The workers were exposed to a risk of falling 3.5 to 4 m (12 to 14 ft.). Carrying 4x8 sheets of OSB (oriented strand
board) around on the roof surface increased their likelihood of tripping and falling. This is the second time in just over a year that the
firm has been penalized for the high-risk violation of failing to ensure that fall protection was used in places where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or
more could occur.
Dawson Construction Limited | $69,696.79 | Fort St. John | April 30, 2015
This firm was performing sewer work on a residential street. WorkSafeBC observed two of the firm’s workers in a 2 m (6 ft.) deep
excavation with near-vertical walls that were not sloped, shored, benched, or otherwise supported as required. Water from a hose was
running into the excavation, causing soil stability to deteriorate. The workers were exposed to a high risk of serious injury or death. The
firm’s failure to meet the requirements of section 20.81(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation was a repeated and
high-risk violation.
Friendly Construction Ltd. | $10,861.38 | Surrey | May 13, 2015
This firm was framing a three-storey townhouse development. WorkSafeBC observed two of the firm’s workers standing in between
joists on top of exterior wall plates on the second level of a townhouse. They were not using personal fall protection gear, nor was any
other form of fall protection in place. One of the two was the firm’s foreman. They were exposed to a risk of falling more than 5 m
(16 ft.). The firm failed to ensure that fall protection was used, a repeated and high-risk violation.
Genica Development Corp. | $5,899.45 | Chilliwack | April 17, 2015
WorkSafeBC inspected a jobsite where this firm had excavated part of an empty lot for sewer work. The excavation was 2.5 m (8 ft.)
deep but was not properly sloped, shored, benched, or otherwise supported as required. The firm’s worker was in the excavation inside
a hole he was digging in the bottom of it. The hole was about 0.6 m (2 ft.) deep. The worker was exposed to the risk of being seriously
injured or killed if the excavation’s walls had collapsed. The firm failed to meet the sloping and shoring requirements of section 20.81(1)
of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation, a repeated and high-risk violation.
Gerard Frank Abraham / Gerard Abraham Contracting | $7,500 | Langley | April 28, 2015
WorkSafeBC observed a representative of this firm and two of its workers stripping cedar shakes from the roof of a two-storey house.
They were not using personal fall protection gear and no other form of fall protection was in place, exposing them to a risk of falling 5.5
to 7.3 m (18 to 24 ft.). A concrete walkway and driveway below increased the likelihood of serious injury or death in the event of a fall.
The firm’s failure to ensure that fall protection was used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur was a repeated and high-risk
violation, committed knowingly or with reckless disregard.
Gordon Albert Gaudet | $3,092.79 | Burnaby | April 15, 2015
Three of this firm’s workers were re-roofing the flat roof of a warehouse. All three were working near the edge of the roof. The firm
permitted the use of a control zone for fall protection where it could practicably have installed temporary guardrails or had its workers
use personal fall protection systems. This violation of section 11.2 of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation exposed all three
workers to a risk of falling about 9 m (30 ft.) to an asphalt parking lot and a metal fence with barbed wire. The firm’s failure to ensure that
its workers used suitable fall protection was a repeated and high-risk violation. The firm also failed to provide its workers with the
Did you know?
Our prevention team is available to consult with organizations to help them
maintain safe and healthy workplaces.
September / October 2015 | WorkSafe Magazine 31