Must Employers Pay for the PPE Workers Are Required to Use?

One of the fundamental duties of OHS law is to ensure that your workers use the PPE required to protect them against the hazards they face at work. It’s a perfectly necessary rule. The problem is that head protection, eye and face protection, respirators, fall protection harnesses and other kinds of PPE can be quite expensive. And that raises a question of immediate importance, especially in these hard times where so many companies are looking to cut costs.

Can you make workers pay for their own PPE or are you obligated to furnish it at company expense?

The simplicity of the question belies the complexity of its answer. The rules are different in each part of the country. There are 14 jurisdictions in Canada. In 7 of them, the OHS rules governing who’s responsible for paying for PPE are clear and straightforward; in the other 7, the rules are totally vague and ambiguous. This briefing will make it easy for you to keep track of the requirements no matter where you operate.

Must You Disclose Privacy Sensitive Harassment Report to OHS Investigator??

An Ontario company’s policy requires immediate investigation of all workplace harassment complaints. Once the investigation ends, the investigator creates a Findings Report summarizing the details of the case. The Findings Report is so sensitive and confidential, that the employer doesn’t share it with anyone, not even the accuser and accused. Instead, it sends the parties a letter indicating whether the investigation found the harassment allegation to be true and logs the Findings Report into an electronic case management system to which access is highly restricted.

Situation

Two workers claim they were harassed by their supervisor. The MOL official sent to investigate requests copies of all notes from the investigation. The employer offers her the letters it sent to the parties and a redacted version of the Findings Report. But she wants an unredacted version. The employer objects on the grounds of privacy and the case reaches the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB).

Question

Does the employer have to let the OHS investigator see the unredacted Findings Report?

1. No, because it contains sensitive and private information.
2. No, because the investigator just needs to determine if there was an appropriate investigation, not whether harassment actually occurred.
3. Yes, because Section 54(1)(c) powers cover any and all documents related to workplace harassment.
4. Yes, because the unredacted report will enable her to determine if the employer met its OHS harassment duties.

Standard PPE May Leave Women Workers at Risk of Injury

As an OHS coordinator, you no doubt feel a responsibility to look after each and every one of your workers. Unfortunately, the safety equipment and PPE that you select may be furnishing ample protection to only some of those workers. Stated baldly, most PPE used in the workplace today is engineered for men. That’s why a new CSA study finds that only 6% of Canadian women feel as if the PPE they use at work is designed for them. And when PPE doesn’t fit right or feels uncomfortable, workers may seek to alter it with scissors, duct tape, safety pins, rubber bands, string and other makeshift “solutions.” They may also use it in ways that go against their training and instructions. And in some cases, they may not use their PPE at all.

End Result

Too many female workers aren’t getting adequate protection against the hazards their PPE is supposed to shield them from. Worse, because it’s unsuitable, their PPE may actually become a danger to them. Thus, 40% of the women cited in the CSA study reported that something about their PPE caused them to experience an injury or incident at work.

Providing Digital Access to Safety Data Sheets (SDS)

The Safety Data Sheet (SDS) furnishing essential information about a hazardous product, the dangers it poses and how to use it safely, is a pillar of the WHMIS right to know system. WHMIS laws require employers to make the SDS of each hazardous product used, handled or stored in the workplace “readily available” to all workers. The following scenario illustrates what “readily available” means in the digital context.

Situation

Maintaining a paper binder has become a hassle for a manufacturing plant that has over 1,000 different hazardous products at its site. Every time the plant gets a new or revised SDS from a hazardous product supplier, it has to take apart and then reassemble the SDS binder. So, the plant wants to get rid of the binders and put all of its SDS into a digital format that workers can access using computers located at the workplace.

Question

To ensure that its computerized SDS access system is readily available to workers, the plant must ensure all of the following EXCEPT:

1. All workers have their own personal computer.
2. The computers are kept in good working order at all times.
3. All workers are properly trained how to use the computer to access the SDS’.
4. A hardcopy of an SDS is immediately furnished to any worker that requests one.?

Answer

1. The plant must do each of these things except furnish each worker an individual computer.

Explanation

“Readily available” means that workers must be able to access an SDS at any and all times when they’re at work. That doesn’t necessarily mean that all workers must have their own computers. All that’s required is that the worker be able to get access independently and without having to rely on any other person or process. Thus, computerized SDS’ aren’t deemed readily available if the worker can’t use the computer without permission, an unknown password or a key if the computer is in a room or area that’s kept locked. So, A is the right answer.?

Federal Government Mulls Tough New Environmental Restrictions for PFAs

The federal government has decided to drop the green hammer on a class of chemicals known as Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS). On May 20, Environment and Climate Change Canada published a report concluding that all PFAS pose potential hazards to human health and the environment and should be regulated as a class of toxic chemicals under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA).

PFAs

PFAS are a group of human-made substances that are incredibly stable and take a very long time to break down— hence their nickname “forever chemicals.” These properties make PFAS ideal for food packaging, clothing, cosmetics, non-stick cookware and many other consumers use products, as well as industrial and specialized applications such as lubricants, oil/ water repellents and foams for firefighting. According to the government, there are currently over 4,700 kinds of FSAS with more rolling out of the developmental pipeline every day.?

Unfortunately, the same stability and everlasting properties that make PFAS suitable for consumer and industrial menaces make them a potential menace to the environment. Thus, PFAS have a way of turning up at solid waste landfills and contaminated sites across the country. In addition to their harmful environmental effects, PFAS bioaccumulate in humans and other organisms, including cancer, liver damage, decreased fertility and increased risk of asthma and thyroid disease, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Current Regulations

The federal government has banned the manufacture, use, sale, offer for sale and import of 3 subgroups of PFAS and their salts and predecessors, including: perfluoro octane sulfonates (PFOS’), perfluorooctanoic acids (PFOAs), and long-chain perfluoro carboxylic acids (LC-PFCAs).

The current PFAS subgroup bans are subject to limited exemptions depending on the substance. However, the Draft Proposal calls for tightening the current exemptions even further.?

Ask the Expert: Can You Make Workers Wear “Uncomfortable” PPE?

Some of our custodial workers don’t want to wear dust masks because they’re “uncomfortable.” Are we allowed to make them to use the masks for their safety after proper fit testing?

Answer: Yes

Explanation

Rule 1: Under OHS laws, you must ensure workers use appropriate PPE and respiratory protective equipment.

Rule 2: You must accommodate workers’ disabilities to the point of undue hardship.

Rule 2 doesn’t contradict Rule 1 in this case because mere lack of comfort isn’t a disability. However, Rule 2 would apply if the refusal was based on a condition that was, e.g., hypersensitivities or allergies. In that situation:

1. You’d have the right to ask the worker to provide a doctor’s note or other verification of the disability requiring accommodation; and
2. You wouldn’t have to make accommodations that would endanger the worker’s or another worker’s health and safety; such accommodations would be deemed undue hardship.