Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2016, publiée 106ème session CIT (2017)

Convention (n° 187) sur le cadre promotionnel pour la sécurité et la santé au travail, 2006 - Canada (Ratification: 2011)

Autre commentaire sur C187

Demande directe

2023
2016
2013

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of National Trade Unions (CSN) and the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC), communicated with the Government’s report.

Article 2(3) of the Convention. Consideration of the ratification of relevant occupational safety and health (OSH) Conventions of the ILO. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it has continued its consultations with the provincial and territorial governments, as well as the most representative organizations of employers and workers, on the possible ratification of the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), and the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129). In this respect, the CLC indicates that there has been no action by the Government to ratify these Conventions. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on consultations held with the provincial and territorial governments, as well as the most representative organizations of employers and workers, on the consideration of measures that could be taken to ratify relevant OSH Conventions and on the outcome of these consultations.

Article 3. Formulation of a national policy. Measures taken to promote basic principles. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous request, concerning the promotion of basic OSH principles in Nunavut, Northwest Territories, Yukon and Saskatchewan. The Government also provides information on the implementation of trainings and safety-awareness programmes that help create a preventative safety and health culture in these jurisdictions. The Government further indicates that a target intervention strategy has been implemented in Saskatchewan to identify employers with high injury rates requiring intervention. The Committee takes note of this information.

Article 3(2). Right of workers to a safe and healthy working environment. The Committee notes the CLC’s indication that section 176(2) of the 2014 Budget Implementation Act (Bill C-4) has modified the definition of “danger” in the Labour Code, requiring that any hazards or conditions be either “imminent” or “serious” in order to constitute danger. The CLC states that workers will have to be already exposed to harm before they can establish that their working conditions are dangerous, and that they will likely not be able to claim protection from potential chronic or slow-developing illnesses based on exposure to carcinogens or teratogens. The CLC also states that Bill C-4 has eliminated hazards that could endanger the reproductive system of male and female workers from the definition of “danger”. The CLC further indicates that the minister is empowered by section 182 of Bill C-4 to determine that the work refusal was “trivial, frivolous, vexatious or in bad faith” and, in that case, no investigation will be conducted and the worker will not have the right to appeal such a decision to an independent quasi-judicial tribunal. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments on the issues raised by the CLC, as well as on consultations undertaken with respect to these legislative changes.

Article 4(1). Development and periodical review of the OSH system in consultation with the social partners. The Committee takes note of the additional information provided by the Government on the consultations with the social partners on the OSH system in the different jurisdictions. It notes the Government’s indication that the federal Labour Program established the OHS Advisory Committee (OHSAC) as a key consultative forum for stakeholders, which collaborates on preventing occupational injuries, illnesses and accidents in federally regulated industries. The Government also provides information concerning the consultations that took place within this Committee and their outcome, as well as the consultative bodies and consultations held in the provinces of Alberta, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Saskatchewan. The Committee, however, notes that the Government has not yet provided such information with regard to Prince Edward Island, Northwest Territories and Nunavut, Nova Scotia and Yukon.

The Committee further notes that, according to the CSN, Quebec’s Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Council (CSST) has discretionary statutory power to identify the groups that will benefit from the mechanisms established by the Occupational Health and Safety Act (LSST) at Quebec’s provincial level, including preventative tools and committees. The CSN states that the groups identified by this body, however, mainly relate to jobs traditionally carried out by men. Jobs mainly occupied by women, including education and health and social services, are excluded. The CSN adds that if the risk for occupational accident is higher for the men, women’s jobs are more likely to cause occupational diseases. For example, as regards psychological harassment at workplace, where most plaintiffs are women, the LSST tools would enable addressing the issue from the perspective of prevention. The Committee also notes that the CSN observes that Quebec’s list of occupational diseases, established by the Occupational Accidents and Diseases Act, has not been updated since 1985. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the consultations held with representative organizations of employers and workers concerning the development and the review of the OSH system in the jurisdictions of Prince Edward Island, Northwest Territories and Nunavut, Nova Scotia and Yukon, and on their outcome. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on any consultations held with regard to the legislative issues in Quebec identified by the CSN, and their outcome.

Article 4(2). Required components of the national system for OSH. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous request, concerning the bodies responsible for OSH regulative and compliance mechanisms existing in New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Northwest Territories and Nunavut, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Yukon.

Article 4(2)(c). Mechanisms for ensuring compliance with national laws and regulations, including systems of inspection. The Committee notes that the CLC observes, that under section 140(1) of the Labour Code, the Minister of Labour may delegate powers, duties and functions of health and safety officers to any person deemed qualified. The CLC considers that there is a risk that the persons designated would not have the same guarantees of neutrality, independence and training as inspectors. The CLC also states that more inspectors are needed, indicating that only 10 per cent of the 12,321 “high risk worksites” received the minimum number of visits in 2005–07, and that federally-regulated workplaces have seen an increase in disabling injuries. In this regard, the Government indicates that it has increased the number of federal senior Health and Safety Officers (HSOs) to approximately one HSO per 12,000 workers. The Government also provides information about an increase of safety inspectors in Nova Scotia. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to ensure that the necessary human and financial resources are allocated to achieve an effective compliance mechanism. The Committee request the Government to provide its comments on the issues raised by the CLC with respect to the delegation of powers, duties and functions of health and safety officers.

Article 4(3)(f). Mechanism for the collection and analysis of data on occupational injuries and diseases. The Committee notes that, according to the CLC, the databases maintained by the various OSH stakeholders are in many cases still paper-based. The CLC indicates that, in Ontario, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board and the Ministry of Labour have different fatality statistics because they relate to different populations of workers, due to differences in legislative coverage, and that data collected by various stakeholders is not easily linked. In this regard, the Government indicates that the Labour Program has allowed regulated employers to submit their annual OSH reports using a web-based tool. The Government also indicates that the Labour Program data was discussed at length with OHSAC in January 2015. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to improve mechanisms for the collection and analysis of data, including mechanisms for sharing information between federal, provincial and territorial governmental levels.

Article 5. National programme. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that OSH programmes in Canadian jurisdictions are developed in consultation with employers’ and workers’ organizations. In this respect, the Government provides information about the consultations that took place at the OHSAC. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that several initiatives have been taken at the federal level to fulfil the requirements listed in Article 5(2). With regard to Article 5(2)(a), the Committee notes the joint initiative of the Labour Program and the Canadian Association of Administrators of Labour Legislation Occupational Health and Safety, on promoting collaboration and sharing of information; and the joint lead of the Labour Program and the Ontario Ministry of Labour on an initiative to share best practices addressing psychological health and safety in the workplace. Funding was provided to non-governmental young worker injury organizations to develop an evidence-based framework for measuring and assessing young worker injury prevention initiatives. With regard to Article 5(2)(b) the Government indicates that the Labour Program also works with and supports the Canadian Standards Association, where subject matter experts form the Labour Program and from its counterpart provincial/territorial labour ministries participate in OSH standards development working groups. In relation to Article 5(2)(c), the Committee takes note of the quantitative and qualitative report presented by the Labour Program and of the fact that the OSH programme is subject to regular audits and evaluations. With regard to Article 5(2)(d), the Committee takes note of the informative table provided by the Government, which presents the objectives, targets and indicators of progress for 2013–14. Concerning Article 5(2)(e), the Committee takes note of the indications of the Government that it provides leadership by promoting OSH through the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety. The Committee also takes note of the information on the legal framework of the OSH programme, the promoting activities and the means of publicizing it in all the provinces and territories, except for Ontario and Manitoba. The Committee requests the Government to provide specific information on the formulation and implementation of OSH programmes, with respect to federal, provincial and territorial jurisdictions.