First Reference Talks

Business, Payroll, Employment Law, Internal Controls & You!

  • Home
  • About
  • Contact Us
  • Free Updates

Assessing risk in the workplace

Author: Yosie Saint-Cyr

Posted on Monday, March 15th, 2010 at 10:00

Tweet

caution-dangerOccupational health and safety legislation across Canada requires employers to identify any existing or foreseeable hazards that might arise in the workplace, and to conduct an assessment of these various workplace hazards that employees might be exposed to, or that may arise from the nature of the workplace, and the type and conditions of the work. A hazard is something with the potential to cause harm, injury, illness or death. This can include substances (both hazardous and dangerous) such as noises, chemicals, temperature, electrical, human blood pathogen, plant processes, work processes or other aspects of the work environment.

Those hazards are also called risks. Risk is the likelihood that a harmful consequence (death, injury or illness) will result when exposed to the hazard.

Employers then have an obligation to eliminate employee exposure to the hazards. If this is not reasonably practicable, employers must control the risks by implementing measures to limit the risk of harm to the lowest possible level. The purpose is to prevent employee accidents and injuries arising out of, linked with, or occurring in the course of their employment.

Effective June 15, 2010, in Ontario, employers will have to add violence and harassment to the list of risks they must learn to assess and prevent. It is not only Ontario employers who need to be concerned about preventing and managing violence and harassment in the workplace. Occupational health and safety laws in several jurisdictions, including British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland and Labrador and in the federally regulated jurisdiction directly address the problem of workplace violence as a health and safety hazard (Manitoba and Saskatchewan include harassment as a risk similar to Ontario). In jurisdictions where no distinct legal duty to prevent workplace violence and harassment is set out in occupational health and safety statutes, the duty falls under the general duty clause, which requires the employer to take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances for the protection of a worker.

The distinction to make between assessing the risk of violence and harassment is that the risk of violence requires a proactive assessment while the risk of harassment requires a reactive one. Employers are also not required to perform a proactive risk assessment regarding domestic violence. The risk assessment is reactive, meaning, if a worker or co-worker reports a case of harassment, or the possibility of domestic violence, or if there are visible signs, then a risk assessment should be triggered to ensure that controls are in place to stop the harassing behaviour and the harm that might ensue, or prevent domestic violence from entering the workplace.

Effective risk management involves identifying all hazards in the workplace, and then carrying out a risk assessment for each hazard, to assess the severity of a risk, before deciding its priority and how to deal with it.

Due to the amount of existing and foreseeable risks that can be found in a place of work, and employers’ obligation under the law to identify and control them, your risk assessment must become a risk management process.

In general, the risk management process required is divided into five steps. These steps can be applied to assess any risk, including the risk of violence in the workplace:

  1. Identify hazards, based on experience, recorded data and other information.
  2. Evaluate the level of risk to workers’ health and safety, based on the consequences and likelihood of harm.
  3. Select control measures from the hierarchy of control (e.g., eliminate, substitute, isolate or engineer out the risks, or reduce them through administrative measures or personal protective equipment) by selecting the highest order control method possible and then proceeding down the list in order.
  4. Implement or apply the selected control measure(s) in the workplace. Make sure that every step is documented.
  5. Monitor the control measures to ensure that they are working correctly to control the risks and that no other risks have been introduced.

Further, risk management is an ongoing process that should be undertaken:

  • Now, if it has not been done before
  • When any new work, equipment or material is planned
  • When planning or making a significant change
  • After a complaint or an incident
  • At regular intervals appropriate to the nature of the workplace and the hazards present
  • When legislative obligations (including regulations) require it or change

Following the assessment, employers must prepare a report with the results of their assessment and a plan to address potential areas of concern. Employers must also advise the committee or a health and safety representative, if any, of the results of the assessment, and provide a copy if the assessment is in writing. If there is no committee or health and safety representative, the employer must advise the workers of the results of the assessment and, if the assessment is in writing, provide copies on request or advise workers how to obtain copies.

The results of the risk assessment allow employers to implement their specific-hazard prevention plan and measures to control, eliminate or minimize a specific risk in the workplace.

This involves the development of strategies that eliminate or reduce the risk. There is no one perfect prevention strategy. Employers vary in size, the types of workers employed, corporate culture and resources, and so on. Thus, the risk assessment, prevention plan, controls and measures taken will vary and be specific to a workplace.

The employer must reassess the existing and foreseeable hazards as often as is necessary to ensure that the related policy and program continue to protect workers from specific risks.

What challenges are you encountering when trying to implement your risk assessment process to ensure you are complying with OHS law?

Yosie Saint-Cyr
Human Resources and Compliance Managing Editor

Tags: Bill 168, Canada, domestic violence, harassment, hazard assessment, hazards, health and safety, occupational health and safety, OH&S, OHSA, risk assessment, risk management, violence

This entry was posted on Monday, March 15th, 2010 at 10:00 and is filed under Health and Safety, Human Resources. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply

Note that some comments may be moderated. If you have not had an approved comment here before, your comment will be held for approval. We are glad to publish comments that address issues raised in the post or other comments on it and that contribute to a fruitful discussion. We do not publish comments that seek to promote commercial products or that seek personal legal advice. Although we do not require it, we ask that in making a comment you use your full name. You must supply a valid email address, which will not appear with your comment.




Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

  • Get Free Updates

    RSS and Email

  • 2011 Canadian Law Blog Finalist

    2010 Canadian Law Blog Finalist

  • Categories

    • Accessibility Standards
      • Integrated Accessibility Regulation
      • Standard for Customer Service
      • Standard for Employment
      • Standard for Information and Communications
      • Standard for the Built Environment
      • Standard for Transportation
    • Announcements
    • Conferences
    • Human Resources
      • Corporate Immigration
      • Employee Relations
      • Employment Standards
      • Health and Safety
      • HR Analytics
      • HRMS
      • Human Rights
      • Privacy and Security
      • Recruiting and Hiring
      • Training and Development
      • Union Relations
    • Internal Controls
      • Environmental Law
      • Finance and Accounting
      • IT, Privacy and Security
      • Not-for-Profit
    • Payroll
      • Benefits
      • Compensation
      • Source Deductions and Reporting
  • Recent Comments

      CommentAndrew Taillon:
      Thanks Chris. I would suggest that the confusion arises from the way damages were...

      CommentChris Davidson:
      I am a bit confused on the terminology you’re using. It has been my...

      CommentLiChing Ooi:
      Suzanne, another timely post on this standard. My question is, there are...



  • First Reference:
    @firstreference

    Yosie Saint-Cyr:
    @yosie23

    Adam Gorley:
    @agorley

  • Like us on Facebook!



  • Links

    • First Reference
    • HR eSource
    • HRinfodesk
    • HRtrack
    • Human Resources Advisor
    • PolicyPro
  • Blogroll

    • All About Information
    • Chambers on the Profession
    • Corporate Governance
    • Corporate Governance & Risk Management Blog
    • Corporate Reporting to Stakeholders
    • Daniel A. Lublin Employment Law Blog
    • Doorey’s Workplace Law Blog
    • Employment & Human Rights Law in Canada
    • Human Right in the Workplace
    • International Corporate Governance
    • Leech Talks Risk
    • Marks on Governance
    • Osgoode Labour & Employment Law Society
    • SBH Lawyers blog
    • Slaw
    • Thoughts from a Management Lawyer
  • Post Archives

    • February 2012 (4)
    • January 2012 (26)
    • December 2011 (27)
    • November 2011 (24)
    • October 2011 (22)
    • September 2011 (34)
    • August 2011 (27)
    • July 2011 (25)
    • June 2011 (35)
    • May 2011 (29)
    • April 2011 (28)
    • March 2011 (27)
    • February 2011 (20)
    • January 2011 (22)
    • December 2010 (23)
    • November 2010 (23)
    • October 2010 (22)
    • September 2010 (24)
    • August 2010 (28)
    • July 2010 (26)
    • June 2010 (29)
    • May 2010 (32)
    • April 2010 (24)
    • March 2010 (22)
    • February 2010 (9)
    • January 2010 (11)
    • December 2009 (11)
    • November 2009 (14)
    • October 2009 (16)
    • September 2009 (11)
    • August 2009 (1)
  • Questions?

    Email us:
    editor[at]firstreference.com

Copyright © 2012 - First Reference | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Twitter | Facebook

WordPress theme designed by web design