Why politics matters
Hands up all those who profess to hate politics and/or don’t keep up to date with what’s going on in our Legislature? Who finds politics boring? Who doesn’t even vote or doesn’t really do any research when they do vote? Well, I hate to say this but now, more than ever, it’s time to start paying attention. That said, this is not an article about politics itself but a factual piece about legislation that will have a huge impact on your workers rights.
Alongside many others, there is a bill currently going through the Alberta Legislature that may have a profound effect on your health and safety at work and how workplace health and safety is managed. So please try to get to the end of this article as I do my best to walk you through some of those changes and how they might affect you.
What is this Bill?
Bill 47 “Ensuring Safety and Cutting Red Tape Act, 2020” was introduced in the Alberta Legislature on November 5th, 2020. It covers three main areas:
The “Heroes Compensation Act”
The “Occupational Health and Safety Act”
The “Workers Compensation Act”
Bill 47 was passed by parliament on December 9, 2020. It will bring in sweeping changes to the current acts. It repeals, or changes, much of the advancement to workers rights that were brought in by previous Governments. This bill effectively rolls back workers rights by decades and cuts costs to the employer at the expense of the worker.
What is the Heroes Compensation Act?
This is intended as a means to provide a one time payment of up $100,000 specifically for first responders, named as firefighters, police officers (including municipal and RCMP), sheriffs, Provincial correction officers and paramedics, who die in the line of duty. It will be administered by the WCB and is aside from the Federal program for this, which is more limited in its scope. This is not contentious and will not affect your work practice. It was provided for information purposes only.
What are the Changes to the Occupational Health and Safety Act?
There are very many significant changes to OHS (Occupational Health and Safety) within this bill. This article’s focus is centred on those that affect us, as an OHS committee, working for you and those that may affect your health and safety at work.
Currently the employer has a duty to ensure the health, safety and welfare of anyone in the vicinity of a worksite and includes those who may be affected by hazards originating from that worksite. The new act clarifies that only “identifiable and controllable” hazards that “materially affect” people are covered. Think of our construction at FMC, this could make it harder to prove that any staff were adversely affected by something that originated there, as it might be decided that it does not meet the new definition. We don’t know how those words could be interpreted.
The current act defines health and safety as “physical, psychological and social well-being.” That definition has been removed from the new version. What effect this could have on future health and safety issues and concerns is unknown at this point. Potentially it could make proving harm harder.
Of concern is the removal, in the new act, of the requirement for an employer to ensure that workers are trained in protecting their health and safety before they use new equipment, perform new tasks, start a new work activity or move to a different site. The new language is more general and open to interpretation. As RNs we are still governed by our CARNA requirements, however, we could be impacted by others around us who do not have licensing body obligations. At the same time, the new act also obligates the worker to participate in any training provided by the employer and prohibits them from performing work they are not competent to do. Not only does this seem to be a contradiction but it effectively puts all the onus back on the worker and removes the obligations from the employer.
There will no longer be the requirement for employers to continue to pay workers affected by a stop work order. This is blatantly unfair to workers, who will lose pay for issues that are out of their control.
The right to refuse work legislation wording has been watered down in favour of the employer. Currently workers have the right to refuse to work if they believe the work subjects them, or others, to “dangerous conditions.” Under the new act the wording has been changed to “undue hazards” which is defined as one that “poses a serious and immediate threat.” This new wording has the potential to exclude many of the situations that might cause an RN to initiate a work refusal, such as the potential risks from the mishandling of a hazardous medication. It certainly makes it harder to prove and seems designed to put workers off taking this route. This could potentially cause a lot more harm to employees.
The new act also removes many protections from actions taken against workers. Currently workers can’t have “discriminatory action’ taken against them for many identified reasons, including refusal to perform dangerous work, informing an employer about work site conditions, seeking to establish a Joint Workplace Health and safety Committee (JWHSC) and such. The new act merely states that a worker can’t be subjected to “disciplinary action” for acting in compliance with the OHS Act. That leaves a lot that is left to interpretation and a lot of wriggle room for the employer. It amounts to an erosion of a worker’s protections in regards to their, and their co-workers’ safety.
The JWHSC will have its name changed to “Joint Health and safety Committee” (JHSC) and the requirement will simply be that the number of employers on the board “shall not exceed the number of workers.” The removal of “workers” from the title tells you an awful lot about the changes being made here. The stipulations on how often they must meet have been removed, along with the mandatory requirement that the workers attending must be allowed the time and pay to do so, it merely states that meetings should be held during working hours. They have also removed the requirement that workers should be paid for the time taken for the training required to be part of the JHSC. The mandatory requirement for the JHSC to participate in incident investigations has been removed and worksite inspections has been watered down to just pertain to assessing the documentation of the employer’s inspections. The new act also removes the duty of the JHSC to develop, promote and assess the effectiveness of measures designed to protect the workforce. The consequences of this are far reaching. The JWHSC has been a reasonably effective tool in getting management and workers talking safety. They have been responsible for much of the good change that we have seen in improvements to health and safety at FMC. The new act removes obligations, allowing less protective measures for workers.
There are no longer separate radiation laws, they are being incorporated into the new act. The effect of this is not yet known.
What are the changes to the Workers Compensation Act?
Some of the most impactful changes within Bill 47 pertain to workers compensation, which again hugely favour the employer; while leaving the injured worker with less income, benefits and job security. The government states these changes will save $240 million in future liability but that ultimately means that injured Albertan workers will lose $240 million from their pockets. It should be noted that the Government of Alberta has just added nineteen of its own people to the WCB, it makes one wonder why.
Current legislation removed the salary cap for sick or injured workers, with compensation solely based on their previous year’s earnings. The new act puts back the cap again to 90% of a worker’s net earnings up to a maximum (which we don’t know yet) determined by the board and will be based on a 40-hour week. Overtime will not be included in the final figure, as it is now. Ultimately it will mean less money for affected workers than under current legislation.
Currently an employer has an obligation to reinstate a worker with more than 12 months of service, who was injured on the job. The new act removes this, essentially allowing for a worker to be laid off for getting injured or sick due to a work incident. The new wording allows the employer to abdicate its responsibility on the grounds that “the accommodation does not cause the employer undue hardship.” It should be noted that Federal human rights legislation regarding the duty to accommodate still applies. Therefore, this could encounter some legal challenges, if enacted by an employer.
The obligation for the employer to continue paying any health benefits that workers, who are off due to a work-related sickness or injury may be entitled to, has been removed. The employer can choose to continue to do so on a voluntary basis. It should again be noted that lawyers have concerns that stopping these payments may have legal ramifications for employers, due to Federal legislation.
Presumptive psychological coverage in the new act is limited to first responders, correctional officers and emergency dispatchers. Others, including RNs will have to submit via the regular process.
Congratulations to those of you who have stayed the course and got to the end of this article! There is a lot we do not know about the impact of this legislation and this is a mere snapshot of some of the most pertinent points that are likely to affect us. However, I truly urge you all to start paying attention to what is going on in Alberta’s Legislature these days. The full bill can be found here, for those who are interested:
No matter what happens, your safety will always matter to us. Please feel free to contact your OHS committee any time.
By Rebecca Brown
Local 115 OH&S Committee
United Nurses of Alberta