Steelworkers Push for Full Release of BCSA Report
Wednesday, May 8, 2013 @ 1:42 PM
Prince George, B.C. – The BC Safety Authority’s full report on the explosion and fire at the Babine and Lakeland mills must be released says Frank Everitt, President of local 1-424 of the Steelworkers union.
“The families, workers and communities have a right to view the full report” says Everitt. Yesterday it was revealed that the 97 page report was not released in its entirety in January of this year. Instead, according to an email from the Vice President of the BCSA Technical programs, Phil Gothe, a decision was made to “release the recommendations and initiate a consultation on a draft Safety order”.
That email also requested that those who had received a copy , “destroy any copies excerpts or references to BCSA’s investigation report”. The email says the reason given for the decision not to release the report was “to avoid compromising Crown Counsel’s review of a referral from WorkSafe B.C.”
Everitt notes the decision to hold back the report followed a teleconference involving BCSA Executive Members, and three Cabinet Ministers, namely Shirley Bond, Pat Bell and Rich Coleman. Everitt says he does not have detailed information on what was discussed during that conference “I cannot tell the conversations they may, or may not have had, all I can tell you is the end result of that conversation has held back on the release of information that is beneficial to us going forward, for individuals going to work without having anxiety and knowing there could have been, or should have been some more precautions taken in our industry to protect the lives of individuals that work in the forest industry.”
CKNW is reporting that Rich Coleman admits there was a teleconference, but that the object was to ensure all the legal aspects were covered. Coleman is quoted as saying " So what we decided on the call is that any information relative to the future safety of any mill etcetera in BC would be released but anything else that might compromise the investigation relative to future charges, particularily the mill explosion, would have to be held back because that was the advice by Crown Counsel." CKNW is reporting Coleman as saying once the legal roadblocks are removed the full report will be made public.
Everitt says there was supposed to be a 90 day consultation process with the industry following the release of the recommendations in mid January, “We’ve had the 90 days and subsequently we’re still sitting on the report. I can only draw conclusions that people don’t want that report out there. I can’t understand why they wouldn’t want that report out there to make sure we’re dong things right in the forest industry.”
While it has been argued the full report was held back so as not to compromise the Crown review of the case and possible laying of criminal charges, Everitt says he doesn’t see how that would happen “What you’re suggesting is that by holding it back some people will say ‘I heard that already I’m not going to make that decision’, a Judge is going to make that decision based on the evidence.”
When asked if he believed the report was suppressed because this is “election” season, Everitt says he has no proof of that, “But it said ( the BCSA) 90 days and we are a month and a half later than that , but I know this, it’s important that we get this information out to folks to ensure they are safe.”
Everitt says he has seen portions of the report “It says there are some areas in the mill, confined spaces, and we should do something different about that. It says there’s a possibility of electrical fires, it names two different areas where the source could have been for it( the explosion) irrespective of whether it was this area or that area, there was an explosion and people lost their lives.”
Everitt says he is pushing the matter now because he wants answers on behalf of the people who work in the industry “I don’t want anything to be withheld. I want to know what the answer is, our members want to know what the answer is, it doesn’t matter if they are Steelworkers or not, they still work in the forest industry, they want to know what can be done to protect them from injury.”
Comments
The timing of the release of this by the Steelworkers is nothing but poitical…If it was not they would have done their jobs and pursued the information without using the media… suspect timing definately.
The TV had the memo, so election or no election release the report it was 3 months after Burns lake then lakelands, 3 months if they moved faster then maybe it could have been prevented, agree release the thing and make sure this will not happen again alo could help people dealing with this.Could be 2 or 3 years before the courts moving
you’re not saying that Mr Everitt would ever be against the Liberals are you?
snicker
bahahaha
darn, almost got through that with a straight face
of course it is political .. it appears that one of the few times that many politicians listen (and may agree to act) is when their political careers are on the line (election time) .. so the Steelworkers are appropriate to push their point at election time
equally the suppression of the report is also political .. unwise to release damming information just prior to an election
and finally, since when does being political make it wrong? politics is politics .. maybe when folks cry foul, it is because the point made opposes their own personal view on the issue
Making a public stink is one of the most effective ways of getting the report released. What is the union supposed to do, just keep asking nicely? The fact that this report is being withheld is also the kind of misbehaviour on the part of the government people are entitled to take into account in the election. It’s bad enough that there is a one-sided 90 day consultation with industry before the union and the public get a look, but withholding the report even after that is outrageous.
Its really none of the unions business.
There supposed to be working for good wages for the employees. If anybody Work bc. needs answers.
It is the unions business, when unions first started they were more worried about the safety of the workers than wages. The unions are the ones that forced mine owners to bring in safety measures in the mines, good housing, being paid from the time they entered the mine not just when they worked on the face. But the main concern was the miners safety.
Yes, now we have WorkBC but they are not on each job site, union workers and rep are so it is still their business.
It is not as if there has been no attention paid to the issue by the BC Safety Authority (note that it is not WorkSafeBC) in order to mitigate the possibility of further explosions due to similar causation.
To date there have been 3 separate Safety Orders issued in relation to combustible wood dust. The most recent one was issued yesterday and can be downloaded here
http://www.safetyauthority.ca/sites/default/files/combustible_dust_hazard_in_wood_processing_facilities_so-el-ga_2013-02_.pdf
That safety order requires owners and operators of wood processing facilities to perform an assessment of facilities for hazardous locations, due to the presence of combustible dust. Where gas and electrical equipment is installed within a hazardous location, a plan to suitably mitigate the combustion risk must be documented.
That assessment has to be carried out by professionals knowledgeable in that area.
To me it is interesting that they have to order such action. It should be standard practice both for the companies to conduct such assessments on a regular basis and for inspectors to receive such reports.
Mills joint safety committees should be monitoring the receipt of such reports as well and acting on any recommendations.
I look forward to reading the full report one of these decades ……
There must be something pretty damning in that report….probably something pointing at the liberals cutting Worksafe budgets maybe??
Let me see …… who exactly is it that is responsible for Workplace Safety?
WorkSafeBC is an insurance company, the same as ICBC, for instance.
Who is responsible for vehicular incidents causing damage and death – ICBC, Highways, the RCMP, car manufacturers the weatherman or drivers?
They can’t release the report because the cost to make a sawmill like a oil refinery in regards to the electrical code would shutdown every sawmill in BC. Explosion proof equipment is expensive to buy and expensive to install.
As it states in teh Babine reprot from January 2012
“Owners and operators of wood processing facilities are responsible for the safe use of regulated electrical and gas equipment at their facilities, including the proper configuration of equipment used in hazardous locations. The safe use of equipment involves maintaining an environment that is suitable for regulated equipment.”
“Explosion proof equipment is expensive to buy and expensive to install.”
Exactly … safe cars are also expensive to buy ….. in fact, almost everything that is safe, healthy, visually pleasing, etc, is expensive to buy.
Would “qualified professionals” be willing to paint targets on their backs to sign-off on those BCSA Safety Orders? Vague words like “proper” and “suitable” equipment are lawyer bait.
” …in fact, almost everything that is safe, healthy, visually pleasing, etc, is expensive to buy.”
——————————————–
There seems to be an assumption that just because it is “safe” the money to buy it will automatically be forthcoming. Try going to your banker and telling him you need some dough to replace all the electric motors in your mill, (which have never given a moment’s trouble), and all the switchgear, (equally trouble free up til now, with no hint that it’ll give any), with the latest “explosion proof” models.
And some more to ensure the whole electrical room is continually pressurised, and air filtered, to remain dust-free. As recommended by a “qualified professional”. Who’ve you just been held up by for his “qualified professional” opinion.
Tell your banker this won’t add one buck to your bottom line, in fact it’s going to cut into a profit level that’s marginal right now, and barely sufficient to maintain the credit you already have with him you need to operate.
Tell him he HAS to fund you to do this, in the interests of workplace safety. And see his reaction, before he shows you the door.
If profit levels are marginal why do the owners live like kings on the backs of the workers.
Well, 4 seasons, if you think that owners have it so good, why don’t you go and put everything you’ve got on the line and become one yourself?
Have all your fellow workers that feel the same way join you, and buy the business.
Surely if the present owner is “living like a king” off marginal profits, you and your fellow workers should be able to do at least as well, since you’ll all be motivated to work for a profit that’s bound to be larger and one that’ll be all yours now you own your own business.
Less what you’ll have to repay your banker from it, that is. Remember, though, that when you borrow money from a bank, if you’re a small business, your ‘limited liability’ through incorporation of your business isn’t going to count for much.
Your banker will want a ‘personal guarantee’ from you, and your fellow workers, that if those ‘marginal profits’ should somehow turn out to be even LESS than marginal under your ownership, and you can’t repay your loan as agreed, your personal assets are also fair game for attachment if the collateral security held by the business isn’t adequate to liquidate the outstanding loan balance when your business goes into default.
But what’s a little risk like that when you and your fellow workers could “live like a king”?
Dont worry socredible – one thing about the business world: almost without exception, those that complain about the owners having it so easy do not have the ability or ambition to be owners themselves ;)
People died in these accidents. The public paid for these reports, lets see them. Tough luck if it is the middle of an election, what happens if there is another accident? Is any politicians job worth another life?
I’ve got a better idea.Why not have Pat,Shirley,and Rich Coleman come camp out in a running mill for three months,while the sawdust blows around and they use cutting torches,welding equipment and bang on steel parts creating sparks everywhere.I don’t think you’ll have any takers on that invitation and the damn report might just be released.
“Everitt notes the decision to hold back the report followed a teleconference involving BCSA Executive Members, and three Cabinet Ministers, namely Shirley Bond, Pat Bell and Rich Coleman.”
Shirley Bond has a finger in every scandal in this province and she is supposed to be the justice minister of this corrupt BC government.
” Posted by: tdiguy on May 8 2013 2:08 PM
The timing of the release of this by the Steelworkers is nothing but poitical…If it was not they would have done their jobs and pursued the information without using the media… suspect timing definately.”
Hmmm, the timing would have nothing to do with the report just being released would it?
” Posted by: gus on May 8 2013 5:29 PM
Let me see …… who exactly is it that is responsible for Workplace Safety?”
Everyone is responsible.
Its easy to blame others but the Union Leadership and its Members have the right to refuse to work in unsafe conditions. Did they or the Union demand all mills shut down until a safety audit was done.
Why would it be the responsibility of those elected to represent us to have to do inspections of every work place in the Province.
If the mills were as unsafe as the Union is indicating Why would you allow any members to Work.
I guess that is so you can pass the buck while still all receiving a pay check.
Work Safe only needs to be asked.
Who Asked
Who looked into it
Who made recommendations
Where is the Union paper work on behalf of its Members demanding all these unsafe mills close till safety issues that they seem to be aware of were dealt with.
Do the leadership get paid when all its members are not working while they address these major Safety Issues.
Now trying to blame on Liberals
Give your head a shake were not all that stupid.
Now trying to use the death of its members to elect NDP.
Comments for this article are closed.