6.1
Scope of Discussion and Focus Group Participants
Four focus groups were conducted. In the northern region (Edmonton), one group was held
with six OHS officers and another group was held with eleven individuals representing
industry associations and employers. In the southern region (Calgary), one group was held with seven OHS officers and another group was held with four industry representatives and
employers.
Participating industry associations included the Alberta Construction Safety Association
(ACSA) and the Canadian Home Builders Association (CHBA). Employer representation
included safety advisors from LSE’s such as Daytona Homes, Carma Developments, Qualico,
and Christenson Developments. Additionally, roofing, drywall, and general contractor owners
were represented.
Major areas of discussion included: potential challenges in achieving health and safety on residential construction sites, activities the government can engage in to reduce injury rates in
the residential construction sector, the use of administrative fines within residential
construction, and potential solutions that could effectively reduce the rate of injury and fatality on residential construction sites.
6.2
OHS OFFICERS’ Focus Group Comments
The following insight was offered during the focus groups with participating OHS officers:
I.
Major Industry Challenges
Participants from both regions agree that the major challenges to achieving healthy and safe worksite in the residential construction sector are:
i. Transient nature of the workforce.
ii. Lack of consequences for health and safety violations from both industry and
government.
iii. Lack of sufficient OHS resources along with high officer workloads.
iv. Lack of clarity on the OHS officer role. A number of officers reported feeling unsure of which role is supported by OHS as a department ‐ that of educator, or that of enforcer.
v. Lack of sufficient supervision on residential construction sites.
Other challenges included the perception that the culture in Alberta rewards those who get the job done no matter what the cost and can encourage a ‘pioneer attitude’ which often results in safety being given a much lower priority. Unsafe housekeeping practices, a system which relies on piecework, a serious underreporting of injuries, and drug and alcohol use were also noted as challenges within the residential construction sector.
II.
Set Administrative Penalties and Fines (Ticketing)
Generally, OHS officers from both regions expressed some degree of support for a potential use of set administrative fines. The question of who should be the recipients of potential fines was one area of debate. Officers disagreed that administrative fines should be directed at residential construction workers specifically, while more support was given to the idea of issuing fines to prime contractors, contractors, and site superintendents.
Some of the major components of a potential ticketing system were universal application to all levels of the organization, and proposed limiting application to specific instances of repeated flagrant non‐compliance to health and safety legislation. Both groups agree that the legislative framework for a ticketing system does exist. All participants agreed that issuing fines provides an immediate consequence, and that it would “be felt” within a short amount of time by the sector.
Perceived major challenges of implementing a ticketing system included logistical issues
(tracking a transient workforce), safety concerns and fear of verbal and/or physical violence. The latter point was strongly expressed by northern officers who also felt that roofers were of particular concern. There needs to be some clarification around the role of an OHS officer regarding employer support, education and enforcement. The OHS officers indicated they are currently not trained to perform this type of enforcement activity (ticketing). There was also concern raised about taking on this next level of enforcement work when the group felt that they were understaffed to perform their current responsibilities.
III.
Role of Government
The majority of OHS officers agreed that government should take a more active role in educating the residential construction sector and enforcing legislation fully. Additionally, they suggested an initiative where the government could support small and medium sized employers by providing funding for safety training, education, and/or for purchase of quality
safety equipment.
IV.
Possible Initiatives
Ideas regarding effective solutions for reducing injury and fatal incident rates on residential construction sites that were put forward include: partnerships with educational institutions to provide education, training and support directed at individuals before they begin working on site, partnerships with architects to implement safety measures through building design, and use of the building code enforcement to gain adherence to health and safety regulations. Reaching out to industry to develop a closer working relationship with safety advisors from large size employers, who are in a better position to reach and educate a higher number of trades people, was agreed upon as an excellent potential initiative along with educating industry by giving health and safety presentations.
Strong support was also voiced for a specific focus on site superintendents who act as the
company representatives, as these individuals are integral to the effectiveness and
enforcement of safety policy on site.
Generally, it was agreed that a strong cultural change is required within the industry, which spans the entire spectrum of all roles related to the residential construction building process. OHS officers realize that this is a long term process which may take years to achieve. A willingness to be part of change related to safety on residential construction sites does pervade the attitudes of OHS officers from both regions.
6.3
INDUSTRY ASSOCIATIONS AND EMPLOYERS’ Focus Group Comments
The following insight was offered during the focus groups with participating industry
association representatives and representatives from employers:
Participants from both northern and southern Alberta agreed with OHS officers that site
superintendents have a great deal of control over how health and safety is implemented on site and should receive specific attention in order to gain compliance with safety legislation, irrespective of the approach being used.
I. Major Industry Challenges
Similar to OHS officers, Associations and Employers agree that the following issues present a challenge to industry in achieving healthy and safe residential construction work sites:
i. Focus on maintaining high production levels often causes safety to fall by the
wayside.
ii. A system based on piecework dictates that production levels remain the top priority, even at the expense of sacrificing safety measures.
iii. A ‘work hard, play hard’ culture within Alberta. A perception exists that a large number of non‐compliant residential construction workers and employers prioritize financial gains over safety issues. This is intimately tied into the work culture which pervades the sector. Alberta was described, by all stakeholders, as a location to come and make money and that safety is often sacrificed. Other terms used to describe this culture were ‘gambling attitude’, and ‘a pioneer/frontier mentality’.
iv. Lack of proper safety equipment.
v. Serious underreporting of injuries.
vi. Safe housekeeping issues.
vii. Lack of compliance with legislation (particularly fall protection and hazard
assessments).
viii. A lack of OHS officer resources.
ix. Lack health and safety training within the small and medium sized employers’
II.Set Administrative Penalties and Fines (Ticketing)
There was strong support for use of set administrative fines within the residential
construction sector. However, as with the OHS officers, there was debate over who should be the recipients of the potential fines. Generally, it was felt that ticketing should be applied throughout all levels involved in the building process but should be limited to situations of repeated flagrant non‐compliance. It was agreed that one major benefit of ticketing is that it
provides an immediate consequence for unsafe work behaviour.
Industry association members in the northern industry group were cautious about ticketing employers as they felt it follows the B.C. model rather than the Ontario ticketing model. However, the southern industry group felt strongly that if ticketing were implemented it should be ‘across the board’. Both groups stated that particular attention should be given to site superintendents and the role that they play in the safety of residential construction sites.
Participants stated feeling that although OHS officers may be recipients of verbal abuse if issuing tickets to workers, the likelihood of physical violence occurring would be extremely low. Additionally, some fear was expressed that a ticketing system could become more of a ‘cash cow’ than a targeted deterrent. Note: that information provided by the Ontario MoL representatives discounts this notion. Ticketing, in their experience, is expensive and there is no “financial profit” at the end of the day.
III.Role of Government
Participants from both regions agreed that clear consequences for non‐compliant behaviours on residential construction sites are required. A difference was exhibited between northern
and southern industry groups on the issue of government involvement. The northern
industry group indicated a greater openness to government playing a stronger role in the health and safety of residential construction sites. However, the southern industry group
expressed a desire to have government pull back from the industry. Despite these
differences, there was unanimous agreement that a lack of enforcement of health and safety on residential construction sites is a problem.
Increased support for existing programs such as the Partnerships Certificate of Recognition and Small Employer Certificate of Recognition programs, increased OHS presence, consistent application of the legislation, and government‐offered incentives for health and safety to employers of all sizes, was all suggested as areas where government could take an active role in promoting healthy and safe worksites.
IV.Potential Initiatives
Both north and south industry groups brought forward a number of potentially effective solutions. Participants from both regions agreed that increased educational efforts specific to
the residential construction sector are required, from industry associations and from government. When possible, workers new to the industry should be targeted for health and safety education before they begin working on site.
Increased interaction between homebuilders and OHS was suggested by participants in the northern industry group, and support for this idea from industry associations was evident. A higher level of communication between industry and OHS was seen as a valuable initiative that should be considered. One suggestion was to engage in an exchange of information by having OHS provide the industry with an overview as to the state of the residential construction sector, perhaps once or twice a year. This meeting could act as an open forum where all levels of industry are invited to participate. These meetings could also be given a
specific focus, such as workers and site superintendents. This seems like a valuable
opportunity, particularly since OHS officers independently offered this same initiative.
Other suggestions included:
i. Enacting mandatory safety courses for workers caught working unsafely. Under this system, the site supervisor could be tied into the process by having to complete the course as well, or being required to submit a report on the safety incident to OHS
and company superiors.
ii. Shock tactic campaigns were viewed as an effective social marketing tool along with a stress on social responsibility and use of an emotional tie.
iii. A specialized OHS officer unit which deals solely with the residential construction sector was agreed upon as a valuable potential contribution. There was agreement that as little as two officers in a large urban area would be effective.
iv. Importantly, industry is proactively taking on the safety issue to some extent. For
example, some large sized employers are designing and implementing company
bonus structures that are tied into health and safety. Everyone receives their bonus only if no one higher up the chain has violated a health and safety standard.