Canadian Safety Reporter - sample

6 Canadian HR Reporter, a Thomson Reuters business 2017 CSR | June 2017 | News Joint health and safety subcommittee on PPE agreed on new work shirts, but not on how they should be worn. Union's challenge of shirt-tucking rule unsuccessful Employer and union couldn't agree on proper way to wear shirts in plant, but collective agreement provided for following legislative standards BY JEFFREY R. SMITH A BRITISH COLUMBIA employ- er has won the right to imple- ment a shirt-tucking rule in its plant since its collective agree- ment allows it to follow statutory health and safety requirements in the case of an impasse with the union over such rules. Rio Tinto Alcan operated an aluminum smelter in Kitimat, B.C. The smelter had a Joint Health and Safety Committee and several sub-committees responsible for specific issues, as established by the collective agreement. One of the sub-committees was the personal protective equipment (PPE) committee, whose role was to evaluate and approve PPE worn by employees at the smelter. The PPE commit- tee consisted of one union and one management representative from each of five different areas of the smelter. Over a period of several years, the smelter was significantly re- built, leading to changes in safety requirements. In July 2014, both the company and the union agreed to a new shirt and cov- erall made of wool. The colour of the shirt was orange, com- pared to the blue of the old one, in order to provide higher vis- ibility and greater safety. While the shirt itself was approved by both parties in the PPE health and safety subcommittee, there were no discussions on whether it should be worn tucked or un- tucked in the workplace. However, the company spe- cifically wanted employees to tuck in the shirts, as an un- tucked shirt could lead to a greater exposure to air contami- nants or molten metal if it rode up on an employee. It could also become entangled in equip- ment or be lit by electric spark flashes. The new shirts had ven- tilation under both arms and at the back, so the company wasn't concerned with heat stress. Rio Tinto Alcan's parent company — based in France — had a best practices guide that stated it preferred employee shirts to be tucked in when em- ployees were working. Another smelter the company operated in Quebec had a policy requir- ing work shirts to be tucked into employees' pants, but the Kitimat smelter had no such policy. Employees who didn't want to tuck in their pants were encouraged to wear coveralls of the same material and colour — which 40 per cent of work- ers at the Kitimat smelter did. Risk assessments for different areas of smelter The company performed risk assessments for each of the ar- eas of the smelter, and risks such as moving machinery, burning metal caught in pants, and fire risks were reasons for recom- mendations for wearing clothing fit close to the body. One area — the casting centre — that dealt with hot metal vehicles and the wearing of protective jackets, trousers, socks, and boots inside vehicles or booths had a recom- mendation to wear loose cloth- ing to "maximize cascade effect." Union questioned rule In May 2015, nearly one year after the shirts were approved, the union inquired as to whether they had to be tucked in or not. The company said shirts had to be tucked in at all areas except for the casting centre. It also re- iterated that coveralls were an option for employees who didn't want to wear tucked-in shirts. The union objected to the policy as it hadn't been discussed when the new shirts were imple- mented and some employees who had to work in small spaces or were overweight didn't want to tuck in their shirts. In addi- tion, in certain areas tucking in shirts could cause a safety risk, as splashing molten metal could get caught in the crevice between the tucked-in shirt and pants. The union said there should be a risk assessment for each occupa- tion in the smelter to determine if tucking in was necessary. A unilateral rule was unfair and a violation of the collective agree- ment, the union said, especially since the collective agreement stated that if a joint committee was unable to reach agreement on a health and safety matter, it could take the matter to the workers' compensation board to investigate and try to resolve it. The arbitrator found that under the B.C. Workers' Com- pensation Act, employers were ultimately responsible to ensure the health and safety of all its employees. The act also stated that every employee must take "reasonable care to protect" their own health and safety in the workplace. This was also in- dicated by the collective agree- ment, which stipulated that "it is the responsibility of manage- ment to make adequate provi- sion for the safety and health of all employees during the hours of their employment." The col- lective agreement also said that "all standards established by law shall constitute minimum acceptable practice to be im- proved upon by agreement" of the smelter's occupational health and safety and environ- mental committee and its sub- committees. Where there was disagreement, the parties must act in accordance with the ap- plicable legislation. The arbitrator pointed out that B.C.'s occupational health and safety regulations required that "if there is a risk to an em- ployee from exposure to hazard- ous substances, the employer must either eliminate the ex- posure or control the harmful levels, by amongst other things, providing 'personal protective equipment'" that protects the skin against "contamination, in- fection, puncture or abrasion, or any other adverse effect." This includes the instruction that employees "must wear properly fitting protective equipment ap- propriate to the work being done and the hazards involved" and for circumstances with moving machinery or electrically ener- gized equipment, "the clothing of the worker must fit closely about the body." The arbitrator found that the health and safety regulations supported Rio Tinto Alcan's policy that the new work shirts must be tucked into employ- ees' pants. Since the collective agreement stipulated that the statutory requirements must be followed if there was an impasse in the joint health and safety committee, the shirt-tucking policy must remain, the arbitra- tor said in dismissing the union's grievance. The arbitrator also noted that if the union had is- sues with risk assessments in particular areas of the smelter, it was free to grieve any of them individually. For more information see: • Rio Tinto Alcan Inc. and Unifor, Local 2301 (Change to Personal Protective Equip- ment Standards), Re, 2016 Car- swellBC 1547 (B.C. Arb.).

• Cover