Occupational Health and Safety Tribunal Canada

 

 

 

 

 

CANADA LABOUR CODE

PART II

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

 

 

 

 

Correctional Service of Canada

appellant

 

 

and

 

 

Lonnie Brant

Respondent

 

________________

Decision No.: 06-035

October 13, 2006

 

 

 

 

This case was decided by Appeals Officer Pierre Guénette.

 

 

For the appellant

Richard Fader, Counsel

 

For the respondent

Lonnie Brant, Correctional Officer I (CXI)

 

Health and Safety Officer

Bob Tomlin, Labour Program, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada ,

Toronto District – North York , Ontario

 

[1] This case concerns an appeal made on August 17, 2006 under the Canada Labour Code, Part II, subsection 146(1), by Richard Fader, Counsel for Correctional Service of Canada, against a direction issued by Health and Safety Officer (HSO) Bob Tomlin following his investigation of the work refusal of Mr. Lonnie Brant.

 

[2] According to HSO Tomlin’s investigation report, on August 2, 2006 , Mr. Brant refused to work because he was scheduled to be the armed officer on an escort and he had not been properly trained or given the protocol on how to conduct himself as the armed/unarmed officer. Furthermore, Mr. Brant stated that “his leaving might have placed other staff at a risk of danger due to staff shortage and the reduced ability to respond to emergencies in the situation.”

 

[3] Further to his investigation, HSO Tomlin issued a direction with two items to Correctional Service of Canada under paragraphs 145.(1)(a) and (b) of the Canada Labour Code as follow:

 

“The said health and safety officer is of the opinion that the following provisions of the Canada Labour Code, Part II, have recently been contravened:

 

No. / No: 1

124 – Canada Labour Code Part II,

Every employer shall ensure that the safety and health at work of every person employed by the employer is protected.

 

Correctional Officers have not been trained and/or retained to industry standards, especially those concerned with armed escorts in public environments, where they may be expected to perform their duties based on the “use of force model” currently in use under the Correctional Service Canada National Training Standards.

 

No. / No: 2

124 - Canada Labour Code Part II,

Every employer shall ensure that the safety and health at work of every person employed by the employer is protected.

 

Equipment appropriate to the requirements of the Correctional Service Canada National Training Standard for the work being performed may not meet industry standards and/or may not be available.

 

Therefore, you are HEREBY DIRECTED, pursuant to subsection 145(1)(a) of the Canada Labour Code, part II, to terminate the contraventions no later that

17^th. August 2006.

 

Further, you are HEREBY DIRECTED, pursuant to Paragraph 145(1)(b) of the Canada Labour Code, Part II, within the time specified by the health and safety officer, to take steps to ensure that the contravention does not continue or reoccur.

 

[4] On October 4, 2006 , Mr. Richard Fader, Counsel for Correctional Service of Canada, sent a letter to this Office indicating that Correctional Service of Canada was withdrawing its appeal of the direction.

 

[5] Considering the written request to withdraw the appeal and having reviewed the file, I accept this request and declare this case closed.

 

 

 

 

_______________________

Pierre Guénette

Appeals officer

SUMMARY OF APPEALS OFFICER DECISION

 

 

Decision 06-035

 

Appellant Correctional Service of Canada

 

Respondent Lonnie Brant

 

Provisions

 

Canada Labour Code 146(1)

Keywords Withdrawal, Armed escort, Staff shortage.

 

SUMMARY

 

On August 17, 2006 , Correctional Service of Canada appealed a direction issued following the work refusal of Mr. Brant. On October 4, 2006 , Correctional Service of Canada withdrew its appeal of the instruction.