WorkSafe

Penalties
(continued)
information, instruction, training, and supervision needed to ensure their health and safety in carrying out their work, a
repeated violation.
G S Framing Ltd. | $8,257.60 | Vancouver | April 9, 2015
This firm was framing a newly built two-storey house. WorkSafeBC observed three of the firm’s workers among the trusses near the
edge of the steep partially sheathed roof. No fall protection system was in use, so the workers were exposed to a risk of falling 8 to
9.5 m (26 to 31 ft.). The firm’s failure to ensure that fall protection was used was a repeated and high-risk violation.
HA Brar Siding & Woodwork Ltd. | $5,092.73 | Mission | February 20, 2015
At a site where a two-storey house was under construction, WorkSafeBC observed two of this firm’s workers on a plank supported by a
ladder-jack system at a height of 4.5 m (15 ft.). The plank had no guardrails and the workers were not using personal fall protection gear.
The firm failed to ensure that fall protection was used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur, a repeated and high-risk violation.
As well, the firm failed to ensure that guardrails were used, a high-risk violation.
HA Brar Siding & Woodwork Ltd. | $5,000 | Mission | June 1, 2015
This firm was applying siding to a two-storey house under construction. WorkSafeBC observed the firm’s worker on a plank supported
by a ladder-jack system at a height of about 3.4 m (11 ft.). The plank had no guardrails and the worker was not using personal fall
protection gear. The firm knowingly or with reckless disregard failed to ensure that fall protection was used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or
more could occur, a repeated and high-risk violation. This is the second time in less than four months that the firm has been penalized
for this type of violation.
Haab Holdings Ltd. | $34,995.62 | Fort St. John | April 7, 2015
WorkSafeBC observed two of this firm’s workers in a 2 m (6.5 ft.) deep excavation that was not sloped, shored, benched, or otherwise
supported as required. The workers were exposed to a high risk of serious injury or death if the excavation walls had collapsed. The
firm’s failure to meet the sloping and shoring requirements of section 20.81(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation was a
repeated and high-risk violation.
Hayer Demolition Ltd. | $1,661.16 | Richmond | April 7, 2015
Three of this firm’s workers were stripping the interior of a pre-1990 house slated for demolition. A WorkSafeBC prevention officer
inspected the worksite and found that asbestos-containing materials such as duct tape had not been safely removed prior to demolition
work. The workers were not wearing the required safety gear for such work and were not using safe asbestos-removal procedures. They
were therefore exposed to asbestos fibres, increasing their risk of serious illness and death. The firm failed to ensure that demolition
work was stopped when hazardous materials were discovered at the site. This was a repeated violation.
Hayer Demolition Ltd. | $4,152.90 | Richmond | April 7, 2015
An inspection of this firm’s work at a pre-1990 house slated for demolition found violations of safety requirements related to hazardous
materials. On June 2, 2014, WorkSafeBC ordered this firm to submit a Notice of Compliance with sections of the Workers
Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. The firm had until June 18 to do so. In September 2014 the firm
submitted an inadequate response to the orders. By March 18, 2015, no further communication from the firm had been received. The
firm is being penalized for its failure to comply with an order of WorkSafeBC, a violation of section 115(1)(b) of the Act committed
knowingly or with reckless disregard.
Integrity Roofing Corporation | $5,982.75 | Salmon Arm | May 7, 2015
Two of this firm’s workers, including a supervisor, were roofing a newly built hay shed. Neither was using personal fall protection gear,
nor was any other form of fall protection in place. They were exposed to a risk of falling 4.5 m (15 ft.). Tripping hazards on the roof
included air lines and piles of roofing material. The firm failed to provide its workers with the information, instruction, training, and
supervision needed to ensure their health and safety, a repeated violation.
K2 Roofing Ltd. / K2 Roofing | $7,059.03 | Halfmoon Bay | April 16, 2015
This firm was re-roofing a flat-roofed house. The firm’s worker was climbing a ladder to access the roof, carrying a 20 kg (45 lb.) roll of
roofing paper, when he lost his balance and fell 4 m (13 ft.) to the concrete driveway below. He sustained serious injuries. Use of a
ladder hoist and guardrails where the ladder met the roof surface would have lessened the risk of such an incident. The firm failed to
ensure that a fall protection system was used, a repeated violation. It also contravened the requirement not to allow workers to carry
heavy or bulky items up a ladder. Overall, the firm failed to provide its worker with the training and supervision needed to ensure his
health and safety at the jobsite.
32
September / October 2015 | WorkSafe Magazine