[Glenn Demby]

in reply to: Fire Ext. #106962

I wish I could but I don’t have access to NFPA 10. Maybe one of our other users who does have the standard can offer some insight. In addition, what I can do is look up the OHS regulatory requirement if you tell me which jurisdiction’s law applies and the kind of facility you have. Glenn Demby, OHS Insider, Editor in Chief

[Glenn Demby]

in reply to: Competency #106956

Great question. As in all jurisdictions, employers in Saskatchewan must ensure that workers are “competent” to perform the work they’re assigned, defined as “possessing knowledge, experience and training to perform a specific duty” (Sask Employment Act, Sec. 3-1(1)(e). That would presumably include the duty to provide safety training.

However, there are certain tasks that must be performed by a worker who’s not just “competent” but “qualified”, defined as “possessing a recognized degree, a recognized certificate or a recognized professional standing and demonstrating, by knowledge, training and experience, the ability to deal with problems related to the subject-matter, the work or the project.” “Qualified” worker tasks include performing electrical work and operating powered mobile equipment.

The problem is that the OHS laws don’t specify whether a person that provides training must be competent or qualified. On the one hand, the general approach in Sask is that “competent” is the default rule. In other words, a task requires competence unless it specifically says the worker must be qualified. Since delivering training isn’t addressed, the default “competent” standard would apply.

On the other hand, there are also some forms of training that do require not just competence but qualification, such as first aid or operating PME.

Based on all of this, my reading is that general and non-technical safety training must be provided by a “competent” person while more complex and elaborate forms of training would require a “qualified” person.

I wish I could offer a more straightforward answer but there’s a lot of gray area in OHS laws. I hope this helps.

OHS Insider, Editor in Chief

[Glenn Demby]

in reply to: Lift Director for Crane Operations #106874

The best way to answer this question would be to furnish both OHS law and non-regulatory analysis. I’m afraid I don’t have enough technical knowledge about cranes to provide the non-legal perspective. However, I should be able to help with the legal side. Can you tell me which jurisdiction you’re in so I can look up the pertinent OHS regulations?

[Glenn Demby]

in reply to: Portable Ladder #106721

Yes, as in all jurisdictions, employers in Saskatchewan must provide fall protection to workers at risk of falling 3 metres or more. This is true regardless of whether the worker is on a portable ladder, elevated surface, lifting device, etc. Basic Rule: Unless there’s a guard rail or similar barrier in place, you must implement a written fall protection plan for the site. See SK OHS Regs, Section 9-3.

I hope that answers your question. Glenn Demby, OHS Insider Editor in Chief

[Glenn Demby]

in reply to: Hearing test requirements for federally regulated employees #106688

I apologize for not replying sooner.

While I don’t know enough about your business to say this with 1,000% metaphysical certainty, what I can say is that airlines are subject to federal and not provincial OHS Regulations, i.e., Canada Labour Code and the Canadian OHS Regulations.

And, yes, noise hazard control is required under the COHS Regs, namely in Part VII. It’s also required under the Aviation OHS Regulations, under Part 2. However, neither of these federal Regs specifically require annual hearing testing the way BC and I believe Alberta OHS regulations do. That’s likely to change but testing isn’t part of the deal right now. Of course, regulatory requirements are just minimum standards and testing of airline employees who are exposed to noise hazards is highly advisable as a best practice.

Hope that helps. I’ll try to be faster in responding in the future. Glenn Demby, OHS Insider Editor in Chief

[Glenn Demby]

in reply to: Fire Alarm Pull Stations #106679

I don’t blame you. Searching the Fire Code is only slightly more pleasant than a root canal. I’m sorry I wasn’t able to spare you from the experience. But, if you’re in doubt, you may be able to make life simpler by just posting the sign. Of course, I have no idea of the actual situation you’re dealing with. Good luck and thanks for the question.

[Glenn Demby]

in reply to: Fire Alarm Pull Stations #106674

That is not an express requirement of OHS Regulations in Saskatchewan or, to my knowledge, in any other province. However, keep in mind that the OHS regulations aren’t the primary source of requirements governing fire alarms in workplaces. In fact, the OHS regulations get into these issues in only a general way. It’s also imperative to check the requirements of fire codes, starting with the National Fire Code of Canada, 2020. Provincial and municipal fire and building codes may also apply. These laws provide the nuts and bolts details on fire alarms and equipment. Hope this helps. Glenn Demby, Editor In Chief, OHS Insider

[Glenn Demby]

in reply to: Can any employee sit in on the JHSC? #106358

By “sit in,” do you mean serve as a member of? The general answer is that a JHSC must have a minimum number of both management and worker members. The latter must work at the site of the JHSC and be elected as members. There may be restrictions on which workers can serve as worker representatives, especially in a union workplace, depending on the jurisdiction. If you tell me which jurisdiction you’re in, I can look up the worker member eligibility rules that apply.

If by “sit in” you mean attend a JHSC meeting, then, yes, any worker may attend the meeting unless the particular JHSC has a bylaw restricting attendance, in which case the bylaw restrictions apply.

Hope that answers your question. I’ll be happy to follow up if you tell me which jurisdiction you’re in or have further questions.

Glenn Demby, OHS Insider Editor-in-Chief

[Glenn Demby]

in reply to: Aisle Width #106287

My colleague pointed you to the right provision of the OHS Regs. Just wanted to add that requirements governing physical spaces, including minimum widths, dimensions and areas of walkways and aisles in commercial facilities, come not so much from the OHS laws but provincial and municipal building and fire codes. So you should definitely check those sources. Hope we helped. OHS Insider, Editor in Chief

[Glenn Demby]

in reply to: Working in Traffic with Bucket Truck #106225

The work would be subject to OHS Const Project Regs. traffic control requirements for work on a “highway,” defined as “a common and public highway, street, avenue, parkway, driveway, square, place, bridge, viaduct or trestle, any part of which is intended for or used by the general public for the passage of vehicles”

IF A WORKER MAY BE ENDANGERED BY VEHICULAR TRAFFIC–that would presumably include the electrician in the bucket truck, YOU/THE CONSTRUCTOR IN CHARGE OF THE PROJECT MUST:

1. Use any of the following necessary to protect the worker: Barriers; Barricades; Delineators; Lane control devices; Warning signs; Flashing lights; Flares;Traffic control devices; Blocker trucks; Crash trucks; Sign trucks; Speed control devices; and/or Longitudinal buffer areas (Regs, Sec. 67(2))

2. Employer must implement a written traffic protection plan for its own workers that specifies the vehicular traffic hazards and measures listed above used to protect workers and is kept at the project and made available to an MOL inspector or worker on request (Regs., Sec. 67(5))

3. The Regs. say that workers “may be used” to direct traffic but don’t specify criteria on when they MUST BE used (Regs. Sec. 67(3))

4. If workers are used to direct traffic their signs must meet the requirements of Sec. 68

5. If workers are used to direct traffic on a “public way,” i.e., a highway or other street, avenue, parkway, driveway, square, place, bridge, viaduct, or other open space to which the public has access, as of right or by expressed or implied invitationmust, you must meet the requirements of Sec. 69 and wear reflective clothing that meets the requirements of Sec. 69.1

I pasted in the key Sections below. I hope this answers all of your questions. If not, feel free to ask a follow up question.

OHS Insider, Editor in Chief

****
68. The following requirements apply with respect to a sign used by a worker to direct vehicular traffic:

1. It shall be octagonal in shape, measure 450 millimetres between opposite sides, and be mounted on a pole that is 1.2 metres long.

2. It shall be made of material with at least the rigidity of plywood that is six millimetres thick.

3. On one side it shall be high-intensity retro-reflective grade red in colour, with the word “STOP” written in legible high-intensity retro-reflective grade white letters 150 millimetres high in a central position on the sign.

4. On the other side it shall be high-intensity retro-reflective micro-prismatic fluorescent chartreuse in colour, with a black diamond-shaped border that is at least 317 millimetres by 317 millimetres, and with the word “SLOW” written in legible black letters 120 millimetres high in a central position on the sign.

5. It shall be maintained in a clean and legible condition. O. Reg. 145/00, s. 22; O. Reg. 142/17, s. 12.

69. (1) This section applies with respect to directing vehicular traffic that may be a hazard to workers on a public way. O. Reg. 145/00, s. 23.

(2) A worker shall not direct vehicular traffic for more than one lane in the same direction. O. Reg. 145/00, s. 23.

(3) A worker shall not direct vehicular traffic if the normal posted speed limit of the public way is more than 90 kilometres per hour. O. Reg. 145/00, s. 23.

(4) A worker who is required to direct vehicular traffic,

(a) shall be a competent worker;

(b) shall not perform any other work while directing vehicular traffic;

(c) shall be positioned in such a way that he or she is endangered as little as possible by vehicular traffic; and

(d) shall be given adequate written and oral instructions, in a language that he or she understands, with respect to directing vehicular traffic, and those instructions shall include a description of the signals that are to be used. O. Reg. 145/00, s. 23.

(5) The written instructions referred to in clause (4) (d) shall be kept at the project. O. Reg. 145/00, s. 23.

69.1 (1) A worker who may be endangered by vehicular traffic shall wear a garment that covers at least his or her upper body and has the following features:

1. The garment shall be fluorescent blaze or international orange in colour.

2. On the front and the back, there shall be two yellow stripes that are 5 centimetres wide. The yellow area shall total at least 500 square centimetres on the front and at least 570 square centimetres on the back.

3. On the front, the stripes shall be arranged vertically and centred and shall be approximately 225 millimetres apart, measured from the centre of each stripe. On the back, they shall be arranged in a diagonal “X” pattern.

4. The stripes shall be retro-reflective and fluorescent. O. Reg. 145/00, s. 23.

(2) If the garment is a vest, it shall have adjustable fit. O. Reg. 145/00, s. 23.

(3) A nylon vest to which this section applies shall also have a side and front tear-away feature. O. Reg. 145/00, s. 23; O. Reg. 345/15, s. 12.

(4) In addition, a worker who may be endangered by vehicular traffic during night-time hours shall wear retro-reflective silver stripes encircling each arm and leg, or equivalent side visibility-enhancing stripes with a minimum area of 50 square centimetres per side. O. Reg. 145/00, s. 23.

[Glenn Demby]

in reply to: Working in Traffic with Bucket Truck #106214

1. Safety Precautions: Would be not recommended but required by the OHS regulations of your province. If you tell me where you operate (or if you’re federally regulated), I’ll do the research and let you know the exact requirements.

2. The definition of “construction” depends on the nature of the work, not how long it lasts. So, yes, if the site would constitute a “construction project” under your jurisdiction’s OHS laws, you would be subject to the more stringent OHS rules for construction.

3. Again, I believe that this is more a matter of regulation than best practice. I’ll see what I can find once I know which jurisdiction’s laws apply.

OHS Insider, Editor in Chief

[Glenn Demby]

in reply to: Grinding Galvanized Metal #105191

This question is beyond my expertise. But here are some sources that may prove helpful

Welding Fume Hazards: A Closer Look at Galvanized Steel

https://southatlanticllc.com/blog/can-you-weld-galvanized-steel/ (Check Factor 2)

Weekly Safety Meeting – Welding Galvanized Steel Safely

https://www.robovent.com/learn/blog/metal-fume-fever-causes-and-prevention/ Discusses Metal Fume Fever

https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=f456db148e2587a4348b2faf9c695f2f5f20a5eb More technical info, although a bit dated

https://www.hunker.com/12349925/the-dangers-of-cutting-galvanized-steel

Hope this helps. Glenn

[Glenn Demby]

in reply to: Fall Protection System- Which requires engineers? #105186

I hope this answers your question. If not, you can contact me directly at glennd@bongarde.com. I’m the editor of OHS Insider.

Fixed Ladders: OHS Code requires fixed ladders to meet Process Industry Practices (PIP) which are created by engineers, specifically:
130(1) An employer must ensure that a fixed ladder installed on or after April 30, 2004 meets the requirements of PIP Standard STF05501 (February 2002), Fixed Ladders and Cages, published by the Construction Industry Institute.
130(3) If a fixed ladder is made of a material other than steel, the employer must ensure that the design is certified by a professional engineer as being as strong as or stronger than that required by PIP Standard STF05501.
Rest Platforms: Fixed ladders are also required to have rest platforms. However, the following exception applies: Rest platform exemption 132 If each worker working on a drilling rig or service rig on a fixed ladder is equipped with and wears a climb assist device that complies with the manufacturer’s specifications or specifications certified by a professional engineer, an employer is not required to (a) provide the ladder with rest platforms, or (b) have the side rails extend not less than 1050 millimetres above the point at which the workers get on or off.
Ladder Platforms: I’m not sure what you mean by “ladder platforms.” However, the Code specifies that “climbable structure” means an engineered or architectural work where the primary method of accessing the structure is by climbing the structure with the principle means of support being the climber’s hands and feet;
Handrails: The Code doesn’t say handrails on stairs must be designed by an engineer but does set out criteria: 123(2) An employer must ensure that a stairway is equipped with a handrail that (a) extends the entire length of the stairway, (b) is secured and cannot be dislodged, (c) is between 800 millimetres and 920 millimetres above the front edge of the treads, and (d) is substantial and constructed of lumber that is not less than 38 millimetres by 89 millimetres or material with properties the same as or better than those of lumber.
Guardrails: The Code doesn’t say guardrails must be designed by an engineer but does set out safety standards they must meet: 315(1) An employer must ensure that a guardrail required by this Code (a) has a horizontal top member installed between 920 millimetres and 1070 millimetres above the base of the guardrail, (b) has a horizontal, intermediate member spaced mid-way between the top member and the base, (c) has vertical members at both ends of the horizontal members with intermediate vertical supports that are not more than 3 metres apart at their centres, and (d) is constructed of lumber that is 38 millimetres by 89 millimetres or of material with properties the same as or better than those of lumber. 315(2) Despite subsection (1), a temporary guardrail does not require a horizontal intermediate member if it has a substantial barrier positioned within the space bounded by the horizontal top member, toe board and vertical members that prevents a worker from falling through the space. 315(3) An employer must ensure that a guardrail is secured so that it cannot move in any direction if it is struck or if any point on it comes into contact with a worker, materials or equipment.
Double Bar Safety Gates on Platforms or at the top of ladders: 130(4) The employer must ensure that a self-closing double bar safety gate, or equally effective barrier, is provided at ladderway floor openings and platforms of fixed ladders installed on or after April 30, 2004. To the extent that these components are integral to the fixed ladder and the fixed ladder design must meet PIP/engineering standards, then yes, the gate design would also have to meet engineering standards.
Permanent fixed anchor points: First of all, the Code defines “anchor” as an engineered component for coupling a fall arrest or travel restraint system. Under Sec. 152, an anchor rated at 2 times the maximum arresting force must be designed, installed and used in accordance with EITHER the manufacturer’s specifications OR specifications certified by a professional engineer. The Code doesn’t specifically address whether the anchor points are bolted or welded.
Rail horizontal rail system attached to a building structure with attached SRL(purpose to climb on top of dry rail cars with tools to unplug the rail car). I’m not sure if this is on point but Sec. 153(1) says an employer must ensure that a flexible horizontal lifeline system manufactured on or after July 1, 2009 meets the requirements of (a) CSA Standard Z259.13-04, Flexible Horizontal Lifeline Systems, or (b) the applicable requirements of CSA Standard Z259.16-04, Design of Active Fall-Protection Systems. 153(2) An employer must also ensure that a rigid horizontal fall protection system is designed, installed and used in accordance with (a) the manufacturer’s specifications, or (b) specifications certified by a professional engineer

[Glenn Demby]

in reply to: CSA Question #105178

I couldn’t find anything in the OHS Code specifically related to the equipment you describe. So unless I’m missing something, it wouldn’t have to comply with the CSA standard. I’m assuming we’re talking about beer kegs and such being lifted onto trucks and platforms that would otherwise be lifted manually and that we’re not talking about cranes, hoists, slings and other forms of special equipment. Such equipment IS subject to more stringent regulation, including the requirement to meet CSA standards. Here are what I believe are the relevant parts of the Alberta OHS Code for this situation.

As for the last question, as a general rule, it’s preferable to upgrade equipment that poses potential danger to safety to a product that meets CSA or other accepted standards. I just don’t believe it’s legally required in this particular case and equipment. But, heck, why not upgrade if you can afford it? Hope that helps. Glenn

Equipment
208(1) An employer must provide, where reasonably practicable, appropriate equipment for lifting,
lowering, pushing, pulling, carrying, handling or transporting heavy or awkward loads.
208(2) An employer must ensure that workers use the equipment provided under subsection (1).
208(3) Workers must use the equipment provided for lifting, lowering, pushing, pulling, carrying,
handling or transporting heavy or awkward loads.
208(4) For the purposes of this section, a heavy or awkward load includes equipment, goods,
supplies, persons and animals.

Approved equipment
15 If this Code requires equipment or personal protective equipment to be approved by a named
organization, an employer must use best efforts to ensure that the seal, stamp, logo or similar
identifying mark of that organization is on the equipment or personal protective equipment and legible.

[Glenn Demby]

in reply to: CSA Question #105175

It’s generally advisable to ensure equipment meets CSA or other applicable nongovernment standards. Whether it’s an OHS requirement depends on which jurisdiction you’re in. Can you also tell me a bit more about the operation–this information is especially important if you’re subject to Ontario OHS law. Once I get the picture, I’ll check the applicable OHS regulations and let you know what I find. Thanks. Glenn Demby, Editor. You can also reach me directly at glennd@bongarde.com

[Author]

Posts