UNIThD STIRWORKIRS U.S.W. LOCAL 2251SCHOLARSHIPS IN

RECOGNITIONOF MARIE KELLY, JEFF MCLEOD

& DOUG OLTHUIS

Marie Kelly, has been a valued resource to the Steelworkers Leadership on contractual andlegislated issues affecting their members. She has a key role in bankruptcy negotiations, andhas been heavily involved in the restructuring of Canada’s basic steel sector.

Made started her careerat the USW Canadian National Office in 1989. She initially joined asan articling student and in 1991 started as a lawyer in the USW National Office’s LegalDepartment. Marie has represented the Steelworkers at numerous Labour Board, Arbitrationand court hearings throughout her years as a steelworker staff lawyer.

Marie is a key public voice for her union, and plays a fundamental role in the development anddelivery of training and education within District 6. Made Kelly has also served on the Board forthe Ontario Federation of Labour.

Jeff McLeod, a Sault Ste. Marie native, passed away December 2000 at the age of. At thetime of his death he held the position of Vice President of Local Union 2251 and was a wellknown union activist. Jeff exemplified the Steelworkers’ spirit and was instrumental in raisingover $80,000.00 to assist in a four year strike at Red Lake, Ontario. One winter, he literallygave the coat off his back to help a stranger on the street who needed one.

Doug Olthuis, has been a Staff Representative of the United Steelworkers since 1985. From1985 to 1998 he worked as part of the Research Department of the USW Canadian NationalOffice. He was involved in much of the major bargaining of the union in the steel and miningindustries. Doug was also responsible for overseeing the union’s TARP research project intotechnological change and work organization, and was part of the team that negotiated theworker participation language at Algoma Steel.

From 1998 to 2004 Doug acted as USW Area Coordinator for North-Eastern Ontario in SaultSte. Marie. Doug was part of the union’s negotiation team involved in the 2002 CCAArestructuring of Algoma Steel. He sewed on the Board of Directors for Algoma Steel as a unionnominated director from 2002-2004.

In December of 2004 he was named Executive Director of the Steelworkers Humanity Fund.

In honour of these three people, who exemplify the steelworkers’ spirit and dedication to helpothers, Local Union 2251 will be offering fifteen (15) $1,000.00 scholarships to children(including stepchildren and grandchildren) of Local 2251 active, deceased or retired members.If there are, at any point, insufficient qualified scholarship applicants from within the Local 2251recipients, the scholarship may be awarded to the children or grandchildren of any Essar SteelAlgoma Inc. employee, or failing that, any resident of Sault Ste. Marie and District.

UNInIS flflfl 101

APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS

• year students applying to University must have a minimum average of 70% using their best4U or U/C including ENG4U.

• 1St year students applying to college must have a minimum average of 70% using their 6 bestsenior level (Grade 11 or 12) courses including either ENG4C or ENG4U.

• 2nd, 3rd or 4th year students must be enrolled full time in 30 credits over 2 consecutive terms ofstudy (fall & winter). A course transcript must be submitted with their application.

• Scholarships will be awarded based on academic achievements, financial need and aninterview.

• All students must supply proof of registration before the scholarship will be awarded.

• A student shall only be awarded one scholarship.

• Students must submit a 500-word (minimum) essay on question supplied.

• Students must be enrolled full time in 30 credits over 2 consecutive terms of study (fall & winter).

• Proof of registration to Algoma University/Sault College/or another University/College is requiredbefore a cheque will be forwarded.

• Scholarships will be awarded to children (including stepchildren and grandchildren) of Local2251 current, deceased, or retired members. If there are, at any point, insufficient qualifiedscholarship applicants from within the Local 2251 recipients, the scholarship may be awarded tothe children or grandchildren of any Essar Steel employee, or failing that, any resident of SaultSte. Marie and District.

• Successful scholarship recipients must agree to have their name and photograph published inconjunction with the award and with any promotions of the award.

• Interviews will take place — first 2 weeks of June.

• Application must be received no later than — Friday, May 9th, 2014 by 4:30pm.

Attention: Joe KrmpotichUSW Local 2251 Scholarship Committee8 Albert Street ESauft Ste. Marie, ONP6A2H6

USW LOCAL UNION 2251IN RECOGNITION OF

MARIE KELLY, JEFF MCLEOD AND DOUG OLTHUISSCHOLARSHIPS APPLICATION

Please check one:

Algoma University Sault College Other College orScholarship Application Scholarship Application University Application

SCHOLARSHIPS WILL ONLY BE AWARDED IF YOU AHEND THE INSTITUTION (ie.University or College) THAT YOU WERE AWARDED THE SCHOLARSHIP FOR.

(Please print)

Name:Surname First Name Middle Initial

Address:

_______________________________________

Postal Code

Phone Number:

___________________

Date:

________

Currentof Birth: Average:

________

Educational Background:Names of Secondary Schools Attended Years Grades

Work History (if applicable):

Please list extra curricular activities, leadership experience, awards plus communityinvolvement: (attach sheet with additional information if required)

Local 2251 Members Name:

___________________________________________

Relationship (i.e. son, daughter, etc.)

______________________________________

(Please check one only)

Current Member ci Retired U Deceased C Essar Steel Employee U Community Member U

Address

_____________________________________________

Phone Number

___________________________

Clock No.

Date:

__________________________

Signature:

_________

USW LOCAL UNION 2251MARIE KELLY, JEFF MCLEOD AND DOUG OLTHUIS

SCHOLARSHIP APPUCATION

ESSAY QUESTION

The United Steelworkers have launched a National Campaign. Please find attached two documents, thefirst titled Corporate Criminal Liability 2004-2013 and the second Beyond Westray, Stop the KillingEnforce the Law.

Several Ontario communities, Sault Ste. Marie, Sudbury and Hamilton have unanimously endorsed thefollowing resolution:

Enforce the Westray Amendments to Canada’s Criminal Code

Whereas it has been more than two decades since the Westray mine disaster in Nova Scotia and adecade since amendments were made to the Criminal Code of Canada to hold corporations, theirdirectors and executives criminally accountable for the health and safety of workers; and

WHEREAS police and prosecutors are not utilizing the Westray amendments, and not investigatingworkplace fatalities through the lens of criminal accountability; and

WHEREAS more than 1,000 workers a year are killed at work

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that this Council support a campaign to urge ourprovincialfterritorial government, specifically the Attorney-General and Labour Minister, to ensure that;

• Crown attorneys and police are educated, trained and directed to apply the Westrayamendments;• Dedicated prosecutors are given the responsibility for health and safety fatalities;• There is greater co-ordination among regulators, police and Crown attorneys so that health andsafety regulators are trained to reach out to police when there is a possibility that Westrayamendment charges are warranted.

The Westray Amendment of the criminai code is not being utilized and enforced to the true intent andmeaning of the law.

How can you spread awareness of this law nation-wide and help to ensure better enforcement?

Submissions can be either a written essay of 500 words approximately or get creative and develop yourown personal three to five minute video submission on the topic.

——I

-

4.--.

><

“The Westray story is a complex mosaic ofactions, omissions, mistakes, incompetence,apathy, cynicism, stupidity and neglect.”

The Westray Story: A Predictable Path to Disasterreport from the inquiry led by Justice K Peter Richard, 1997.

>1<

On the cover: The Westray Monument in Westray Memorial Park in New Glasgow, Nova Scotia.

2 8 EYOND WESTRAY Stop the Killing;Enforce the Law

I March 2004, to great acclaim and with the support of a unanimous House of Commons and11. Senate, the Governor General signed into law amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada.

Widely lmown as the Westray Bill, these amendments were so named after the killing of 26 workers inthe explosion of the Westray coal mine on May 9, 1992.

Designed to hold criminally accountable those corporations that fail to protect the health of theiremployees or the public, the amendments marked a significant shift in the liabilities of organizations forthe failure of their senior officers to act.

‘Mr. Speaker, the passage ofBill C-45 represents thefinal step in the House in makingsignflcant refonns to the criminal law as it applies to all organizations. The bill has its originsin the terrible tragedy ofthe Westray mine explosion. Allparties in the Howe co-operated inensuring that the bill received high priority”

Paul Mackiln, then Liberal MP and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister ofJustice,October 27, 2003.

Failure to Enforce the LawIn the years since the passage of these CriminalCode amendments, only a few charges have beenlaid, with minimal consequences for employers.Yet the killing continues.

Every year across Canada almost 1,000 people arekilled at work. Canada has one of the worst safetyrecords of the developed world. Since the passingof the Westray amendments there has actuallybeen an increase in workplace fatalities.

‘What Canada needs is a societal change in how welook at death, illness and injury caused by work.The 2004 Criminal Code amendments must beenforced.

Mr. Speake;; the passge u/B/il C-ISrepresents thefinal step in tile House lizmaking significant reforms to the cthnbrnllaw as it applies to till organizations. Thebill has its origins in the terrible naec/yofthe Westray ni/ne explosion. All partiesin the J—fortse co—operated in ensuring thatthe bill received high prioritj

Patti Mackiln, then Liberal Nit’ and [‘.uli.uucncauySccrcLlry to the N liii iscer nijustice. ( )ctobcr 27, 2003.

Justice Has Not Yet Been ServedThe public inquiry following the 1992 Westray disaster delivered a damning report of management greedand government incompetence. In all, Justice Peter Richard made 74 recommendations. Most notable isrecommendation #73:

“The Government of Canada, through the Department of Justice, should institute a study of theaccountability of corporate executives and directors for the wrongful or negligent acts of the corporationand should introduce in the Parliament of Canada such amendments to legislation as are necessary toensure that corporate executives and directors are held properly accountable for workplace safety.”

BEYOND WESTRAY Enforce the Law

The United Steelworkers, the union representing workers in mines, mills, and thousands of otherkinds of employment across North America, took up the cause and with the Westray Families lobbiedParliament for a decade.

The Westray amendme&s do not address all of the goals of preventing fatal injuries in the workplace, butthey acknowledge management responsibility and the need for criminal liability for the failure to exercise

_________________________________________________________________________________

it.

The Westray BiU will not bring back the 26miners who died, nor the thousands who havedied because ofwork since then.

However, careftil and judicious use of the Westrayamendments by provincial authorities, to addresscorporate leadership failure to exercise theirresponsibility for health and safety of employeesand contractors, will prevent fismre fatalities fromhappening.

“Thefrndamental and basic responsibilityfor the saft operation ofan undertaking, restsclearly with management.... Managementfailed in this primary responsibility and the

significance ofthatfailure cannot be mitigated or diluted simply because others were derelictin their responsibilities.

Justice K. Peter Richard

Cruel IronyThe Westray mine received an award for safety just a week before the mine exploded in 1992. One of theworkers, sent by the company to receive the JT Ryan Safety Award, was Idlied in the explosion. Despitethe overwhelming evidence that came to light, the award was not taken away from Westray until yearsafterwards, after the Richard report was released, and then only after a letter writing campaign fromdisgusted miners and their union.

“Wesrray’s corporate leaders were never penalized.

“There was a time, especially after the charges were dropped that I could have broken somelaws myself I thought about it seriously I thought aboutpunishing those who did this to meand myfamily and the only thing that stopped me was that I knew that I would be heldaccountable, and! couldn’t stand the thought ofbeing taken awayfrom myfamily losingeverything! workedfin’, future plans. I still can t understand why thatfear is not present withcorporations and companies.”

MIen Martin, brother of killed Westray miner and leader of the Westray Families.

BEYOND WESTRAY Enforce the Law

“Thefundamental and basicresponsibility for the safe operation

ofan undertaking, rests clearly withmanagement.... Managementfailedin this prima;y responsibility and thesignificance ofthatfailure cannot bemitigated or diluted simply because otherswere derelict in their responsibilities.

3 LLStiCC K. Pew,- RI. hard

Why Did Parliament Unanimously Support the Westray Bill?

BEYOND WESTRAY

In October 2003 when the Westray Bill was debated for the last time, the House of Commons was madeup of 172 Liberals, 66 Reform Alliance, 38 Bloc Quebecois, 13 NDP, and 12 Conservatives. Memberswere able to come together in one common cause in both the Commons and the Senate.

5Stop the Killing;Enforce the Law

“This Bill is the outcome of the efforts of ordinary members of this House and not an initiative of theGovernment. Members worked hard to ensure that tragedies such as the one at the Westray mine wouldnever occur again or, if they did, that very harsh penalties could be incurred,” said BQ MP RichardMarcean at the time.

No one spoke against the Westray Bill. Somewanted it to be stronger. In the end, it wasaccepted by everyone because something had to bedone.

Liability Before and After- the Westray Amendments

Prior to the Westray amendments, corporationscould only be held criminally liable if the CEOhad personal knowledge of and involvement in theproblem. This ignored management’s rote in thedesign, planning, and supervision of work. Safetyand health is a part of the process and not justan afterthought. Often workers are confrontedwith the reality that production and profit takeprecedence over safety and health.

Before the Westray Bill, organizations and

_______________ _____

individuals in charge could claim they were-

unaware of the potential risks or harm and escaperesponsibility. The Westray amendments create a legal duty to take reasonable steps to avoid bodily harm.

It is no defence for an individual or organization to say they didn’t know there was a problem.

Such a claim could be an admission of guilt. If an individual did not even know of a problem, then theymay not have taken reasonable steps to avoid bodily harm to other persons and failure to inquire couldsupport a charge of criminal negligence.

Enforce the LawIn Canada, enforcement of the Criminal Code is a provincial responsibility; led by the provincialAttorneys General. The performance across Canada of the provincial authorities responsible forprotecting workers’ lives is poor.

Clockwise from top; The Kill a Worker, Go to Jail campaign demands that employers be held criminally ((able for the deaths ofworkers. Bill C45 signed by Prime Minister Jean ChréUen. Run of Muck press conference at Queen’s Park In 2012 releasing the resultsof USW Local 6500’s investigation into the 2011 deaths of two workers at Vale’s Stobie mine in Sudbury. A sawdust explosion killed 2workers and inJured 19 others at a sawmill in Burns Lake, B.C. in 2012. USW members perform a mock rescue exercise.

BEYON D WESTRAY Stop the Killing;Enforce the Law

“There was a time, especially after thecharges were dropped, that I could havebroken some laws ;iysef I thought aboutit seriously. f thought about punishingthose who did this to me and myfamily,and the only thing 1/mt stopped mewas that I knew that I would be heldaccountable, and I couldn’t stand thethought ofbeing taken awayfrom my

family, losing eve;ything I zvorkedfoi;fianre plans. Istill can’t understand whyilmtfrar is not present with coiporationsand companies.

Al len Martin, brother ni killed v’cstrav Tfl i ncrand leader oF the \X&srrav Families.

1.-

,

L

‘••

.4

Despite on-going reductions in the number of claims by injured workers for lost time, the number offatalities at work has steadily increased, profoundly contradicting claims that work is safer.

Almost a thousand people now die annually because of a traumatic event at work. One in 10 severeinjuries among Canadians occurs while working.

Since the Westray amendments were proclaimed into law, only a handflA of charges have been attributedto it. That has to change.

Direction From the Top DownAttorneys General must give policy direction to Crown attorneys in order for change to occur.Workplace &talities are no different than drunk driving, domestic assault or gun violence — they are allthe same in that there is a point when the cause is criminaL - - -

The Criminal Code represents the outside boundary of acceptable behaviour. Governments todaycontinue to pursue policies of deregulation. Today, policing or fire fighting are not the most dangerousjobs. There is greater risk of being killed at work as a security guard, a logger, or truck driver. And if yourjob is contracted out, that risk increases further.

In 2005, there were 43 deaths and 115 serious injuries in the BC forest industry, the highest numberssince the 1970s when loggers were still on bonus and not sdary

“Employers blame the workers and claim that there is a ‘culture of tisk-talting’ causing this,” says theUnited Steelworkers Western Canada Director Steve Hunt.

“Today there are more contractors in the forest industry than ever before, and workers are being forcedby economic blackmail to work longer hours with fewer resources to protect their safety

“Industry, by its reckless, single-minded and selfish pursuit of corporate profits above all else, has createda ‘culture of desperation’ in which workers are pushed to their physical and mental limits.”

The Story of Lyle HewerIn November 2004, sawmill worker Lyle Hewer worked at Weyerhaeuser’s New Westminster sawmill.A supervisor asked Hewer to clean out a hopper that funneled waste material into a hog, a high-speedgrinder that reduces wood waste. Workers regularly climbed inside to manually remove waste-woodproducts and clear out any jams, even though the hopper constitutes a “confined space” as defined inBC’s workers’ compensation laws. Hewer climbed into the hopper, became trapped and was asphyxiated.

Investigators from WorkSa& BC and the New Westminster police found that Weyerhaeuser managementwas aware that the hopper was a safety hazard but had resisted repeated requests to fix it. After Hewerdied, Weyerhaeuser repaired the hopper at a cost of about $30,000.

Following its investigation, WorkSafe BC fined Weyerhaeuser $297,000, the largest such penalty in BC

o BEYOND WESTRAY Stop the Killing;o Enforce the Law

histoiy The New Westminster police recommended charges under the Westray amendments to theCriminal Code.

Yet, in spite of the glaring nature of the case and the urging of WotkSafe and police, the BC prosecutionservice declined to launch a prosecution. Asked in the Legislature, then-attotney general Wally Oppalindicated there was no need to explain the Crown’s reasons. His office (incorrectly) said that the matterwas under federal )urisdicrion.

The United Steelworkers decided that wasn’t good enough. So it sought leave from the courts to launcha private prosecution. Vancouver lawyer Glen Orris began a year of legal work to show that there arereasonable grounds for a prosecution.

The private prosecution was launched in March 2010 in New Westminster Provincial Court. Over threedays of hearings in October and November 2010, Out called 16 witnesses, presenting the Steelworkers’case that there was sufficient evidence for Weyerhaeuser to be tried under the Westray amendments.In March 2011, provincial court judge Therese Alexander ordered a process hearing, allowing theprosecution to proceed. Orris indicated that he was prepared to proceed as prosecutor on behalf of USW

However, the policy of the BC Crown is to handle all privately-initiated prosecutions itself. Ratherthan proceed with the prosecution, in August 2011, the Criminal Justice Branch stayed the proceedings

BEYOND WESTRAY StoptheKllhlng;Enforce the Law 9

against Weyerhaeuser, saying in a statement that, “There is no evidence that management at‘Weyerhaeuser was aware that workers were entering the hog in these circumstances.”

A Deep DisconnectThe Hewer case is just one of many workplace fatalities that should have been investigated through thelens of the Westny amendments. Other recent fatalities that ought to be prosecuted include the deathsof John Wilson at the Craigmont mine in BC; Sam Fitzpatrick at Kiewit’s Toba-Montrose hydroelectricproject, also in BC; Jason Chenier and Jordan Fram at Vale’s Srobie mine in Sudbuiy ON. There aremany more that have escaped justice.

Until there is clear direction from all of our provincial and territorial attorneys-general, there willcontinue to be a clear and deep disconnect between the intent of the Westny amendments and theirapplkatión. Miarties in Parliament at the tinC of the pasag of the Wstray Bill indicated that thenew law would better protect woFkers and hold companies to account by making it easier to obtainprosecutions.

“It is painfiuly obvious that the provinces do not know how to proceed in criminal prosecutions thatinvolve workplace health and safety;” says the USW’s National Director, Ken Neumann.

It’s the Law — Make it WorkThe United Steelworkers, the grown-up sons and daughters of the 26 Westray miners, the families of somany workers killed at work — all support the campaign to enforce the Westray amendments.

Specifically, we are seeking support and political will — just as we did in the aftermath of Westray — forthese specific actions to ensure enforcement:

)‘ Educate, train and direct Crown attorneys to apply the Westray amendments;0’ Give responsibility for health and safety fatalities to dedicated prosecutors;‘ Educate, train and direct police to apply the Westray amendments;0’ Ensure greater coordination among regulators, police and Crowns so that health and safety

regulators are trained to reach out to police when there is a possibility that Westray amendmentcharges are warranted.

STOP THE lULLING

ENFORCE THE LAW

IT’S NOT TOO LATE

BEYOND WESTRAY10 Enforce the Law

-

S. k—

.—.

2’-

—-r 4’

c -t

Ron CorbeilI Icalib Safety & Environment CoordinatorUSW District 33920 Nor-land Avenue, Suite 300Burnabv, BC VSG 11(7ftL: 604-683-1117

René BdllemareI Icaitli Saftrv & Environment CoordinaiorUSW District 5565, boulevard Crémaiie Est, Suite 5 100Montréal, QC I 12M 2W1i1.: 514-382-9596

Sylvia BoyceHealth, Safety & Environment CoordinatorUSW District 620() Ronson I) nyc, Suite 300Ittohicoke, ON MOW 5Z91 d.: 416-243-8792

Gerry LcblancI Icaith, Safety & Environment I)epartrnenr leadUSW Canadian National Office234 Eglinton Avenue East, Suite 800lèronto, ON M4P 11(71è1.: 416-487-1571

www.usw.ca/westray

UNITED STEELWORKERS

METALLOS

Corporate Criminal Liability 2004-2013By Robert Champagne, Legal Counsel

United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, AlliedIndustrial and Service Workers International Union

October 16, 2013

UNITED STEELWORKERS

METALLOS

Summary

Amendments passed in 2004 to the Criminal Code of Canada to make it easier to impose criminalliability on corporations for serious workplace injuries and fatalities are being woeflully underutilized.There have been only three successifil prosecutions under the Westray amendments to date. Sentencesissued in these prosecutions have been paltry. Serious workplace injuries and fatalities continue to occurat alanning rates.Governments can take concrete steps to better enforce the Westray amendments in order to holdcorporations liable for their criminally negligent actions.

The Westray Mine Disaster

In 1992,26 miners died at the Westray mine in Pictou Counbh Nova Scotia as a result of an explosioncaused by a build-up of methane gas and coal dust. Only 15 miners’ bodies were ever recovered.

The Government of Nova Scotia called a Public Inquiry to investigate the causes of the disaster. JusticePeter Richard presided over the Public Inquftç which heard 76 days of testimony.

Justice Richard’s concluded that the explosions and the workers’ deaths resulted from a combination ofcorporate neglect and mismanagement, as well as government bungling and indifference. His keyfindings were:

• the mine’s Intemal Responsibility System for health and safety had failed• mine managers blatantly disregarded health and safety regulations• mine managers intimidated and coerced miners with threats and firings• mine management emphasized production at the expense of safety• government inspectors and officials failed to carry out theft oversight responsibilities

Justice Richard made more than 70 recommendations to improve workers’ health and safety, including arecommendation that the Government of Canada amend the Criminal Code to ensure that corporationsand corporate executives be held accountable for workplace safety.

The Westray Amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada

No individual or corporation was ever successfUlly prosecuted for the workers’ deaths at the Westraymine. At the time, Canada’s Criminal Code made it difficult to hold corporate executives andcorporations criminally liable for serious workplace injuries and fatalities.

For over a decade, Westray family survivors and the labour movement, particularly the UnitedSteelworkers, lobbied the federal government and Members of Parliament to amend the Criminal Codeto make it easier hold corporate executives and corporations criminally liable for serious workplaceinjuries and fatalities.

1

In 2004, Parliament unanimously adopted the Westray amendments to the Criminal Code. The Westrayamendments are primarily focussed on the offence of criminal negligence.

The Westray amendments make it easier to hold corporations liable for criminal negligence by:

creating a new legal duty (s.217.l) that all persons directing work, or having the authorityto direct work, must take reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm arising from work, and

creating rules (s. 22.1) for attributing liability to organizations for the acts of theirrepresentatives which are criminally negligent.

In brief, if a person with the duty to take all reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm to a worker fails todo so, and in failing to do so acts with wanton or reckless disregard for the life and safety of the worker,then that person is guilty of criminal negligence (s. 219).If one or more representatives of a corporation commit criminal negligence and a senior officer (orofficers) of the corporation departs markedly from the standard of care that could be reasonablyexpected to prevent the representative from committing criminal negligence, then a corporation can beconvicted of criminal negligence (s.22.1).

Penalties for a conviction for the indictable offence of criminal negligence under the Westrayamendments are:

Individuals• Injury - 10 years in prison• Death - life in prison• Unlimited fine and 15% victim surcharge

Corporations• Criminal record• Probation• Unlimited fine and 15% victim surcharge

Application of the Westray Amendments

Between 2004 and 2013, the Westray amendments to the Criminal Code have been utilized in only 10cases to bring criminal negligence charges in cases of serious worker injury and death. In those 10 cases,criminal negligence charges were brought against five corporations and twelve individuals.

As of mid-2013, there have been only three successful prosecutions under the Westray amendments —

two in Quebec and one in Ontario. Those prosecutions resulted in the conviction of two corporationsand one individual. Sentences have been relatively minor.

• R v. Transpave — employee of concrete product manufacturer crushed to death; disabledguarding system, no inspection system, inadequate safety training

2

Sentence: $100,000 fine, plus $10,000 victim surcharge

• R v. Serocca — employee of landscape contractor crushed to death by backhoe; failure tomaintain multiple braking systemsSentence: 2 years, less a day, to be served in the connunit subject to conditions including acurfew

• R v. Mefton —4 employees killed, one seriously injured, after collapse of faulty swing stagescaffold; employees not wearing safety lifelinesOriginal sentence at that: $200,000 fine, plus $30,000 victim surchargeSentence on appeal: $750,000 fine, plus $112,500 victim surcharge

Charges have been withdrawn in four cases; acquittals followed trials in two cases; charges in two caseswere stycd by th Crown, including one chargc laid as a result of a private prosecution brought by the_ — -

United Steelworkers; one charge against an individual is pending.

Workplace Fatalities in Canada Continue at Alarming Rate

Between 900 and 1000 workers die in workplace deaths in Canada every yean

• 1993 — 2011: 17,062 workplace deaths (average of 898 workers deaths per year)

* Source: Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety

Reasons Why the Westray Amendments Are Not Being Utilized More

Key reasons for the under-utilization of the Westray amendments:

• The consequences and criminal significance of serious workplace injuries and fatalities have notpenetrated the consciousness of police, Crown attorneys, and provincial health and safetyregulators. There is a prevalent belief that serious workplace injuries and deaths are matters forprovincial regulatory response and not criminal sanction. The evolution of thinking on the needto prosecute impaired driving offences and domestic violence demonstrates an important parallel.

• Police and Crown attorneys face a lack of knowledge, education, training and resources inutilizing the Westray amendments.

• There is a lack of cooperation and coordination amongst health and safety regulators, police andCrown attorneys in the investigations of serious workplace injuries and fatalities.

• Governments and employers continue to push an agenda of deregulation which undercuts thedesire and means to hold corporations liable for their criminally negligent actions which result inserious workplace injuries and deaths.

3

— — I

Vhat is Needed for Better Enforcement of the Westray Amendments?

• Health and safety regulators, police and Crown attorneys need education and training about theWestray amendments and their application.

• Attorneys General need to curtail Crown attorney discretion to not prosecute for criminalnegligence in cases of serious workplace injuries and fatalities.

• Dedicated Crown prosecutors are needed to criminally prosecute cases involving seriousworkplace injuries and fatalities.

• Police investigations should be mandatory in all cases involving a serious workplace injury orfatality.

• Police need education and training in carrying out workplace accident investigations.

• Health and safety regulators must be directed to reach out to police when Westray amendmentcharges may be in order.

• A written protocol is needed to coordinate the efforts of health and safety regulators, police, andthe Crown in dealing with cases of serious workplace injuries and fatalities.

• Dedicated and coordinated teams of health and safety regulators, police and Crown Attorneysshould work on the application of the Westray amendments.

• Greater financial resources need to be provided to police and Crown attorneys to help ensureproper application of the Westray amendments.

4