Skip to content

New occupational health and safety legislation regarding harassment effective in Newfoundland and Labrador January 1, 2020

Twila Reid and Kara Harrington

On January 1, 2020, changes to the Newfoundland and Labrador Occupational Health and Safety Regulations, 2012 (“Regulations”) will take effect. These changes impact employers in a variety of ways, most notably requiring employers to: develop written harassment prevention plans, conduct risk assessments, protect workers from potential family violence in the workplace and to provide training regarding harassment prevention and the harassment prevention plan.

Harassment prevention plan. Section 24.1 of the Regulations requires employers to develop, implement and maintain a written harassment prevention plan in consultation with their occupational health and safety committee, worker health and safety representative, or workplace health and safety designate. The harassment prevention plan must include specific language regarding the obligations of the employer and workers, as well as various procedures for reporting, investigating and managing complaints. Section 24.1(4) requires that the harassment prevention plan be accessible to all workers in the workplace and be reviewed at least annually.

Risk assessments. The Regulations also add the requirement that employers conduct a risk assessment. Section 22.1 provides that the risk assessment must include consideration of a variety of factors, including workplace demographics and previous experiences in the workplace and in similar workplaces, and sets out the confidentiality requirement for the information collected during the risk assessment. Once the employer has conducted the risk assessment, Section 23 mandates that employers address any identified risks of injury to workers from violence by establishing procedures, policies and work environment arrangements to eliminate or minimize those risks.

Family violence. One of the key changes of the Regulations is the addition of “family violence” to the employer’s purview. Section 23(2) requires employers to take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances to protect workers from family violence of which the employer is, or ought to be, aware could expose a worker to physical injury in the workplace.

Training. Section 24.2 requires employers to both participate in and provide training relating to both harassment prevention and the harassment prevention plan.

Failure to comply with the Regulations could have serious consequences for an employer, as well as the employer’s directors, officers and agents. Therefore, it is crucial that employers keep proper records of their compliance, or else they could face difficulty defending against a claim for breach of the Regulations, and new case law indicates directors may also be held personally liable for claims.

Records. Employers should keep records of all activities that establish compliance with the Regulations. Without such records, there is no proof of compliance, and so the employer could still be held liable for failing to comply with the Regulations.

Liability of employer, directors, officers and agents. If employers fail to comply with the Regulations, they may be charged with an offence under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. If found guilty of the offence, the corporation may be fined up to $250,000, as well as up to $25,000 per day for each day the offence continues. Importantly, where a corporation has been convicted of an offence, an officer, director, or agent of the corporation who directed, authorized, assented to, acquiesced or participated in the commission of the offence is also guilty of an offence under that section.

Personal liability. Beyond liability under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, if employers breach the Regulations and a worker is hurt, the directors of the corporation may be held personally liable in a subrogated action by Workers’ Compensation. In a recent Court of Appeal decision from Alberta, Hall v Stewart, 2019 ABCA 98, the Court explained that, while the employer was protected from liability due to the workers’ compensation regime, the employer’s immunity did not extend to its directors, and so without additional coverage purchased through the workers’ compensation system, a negligent director could be held personally liable for any personal injuries he caused to the workers as a result of a negligent act, even though his negligent act occurred as part of his work for the employer. Thus, compliance with all of the relevant occupational health and safety legislation is crucial for avoiding a potentially expanding basis for liability.


This update is intended for general information only. Should you have questions on the above, please contact a member of our Labour & Employment group.

 

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.

 

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


Generic filters

 
 

Atlantic Canada pension and benefits outlook 2020

January 13, 2020

Level Chan and Dante Manna In this update we provide what we see on the employee benefits and pension plans legal horizon in 2020 and beyond, along with a review of some highlights from 2019.…

Read More

Accessible Canada Act – the beginning of a new era in accessibility?

January 9, 2020

Jennifer Thompson The Accessible Canada Act (“Act”) came into force on July 11, 2019, ushering in the start of a march towards a Canada without barriers for persons with disabilities. While the Act only applies…

Read More

Five compliance tips (for employers of foreign workers)

January 7, 2020

Kathleen Leighton If you employ an individual who holds a work permit to authorize their work in Canada, you likely have various obligations to adhere to and can face significant consequences if your business is…

Read More

Provincial Law Voids Limitations of Liability in Contract for Ship’s Engine Parts

January 7, 2020

David Constantine and Joe Thorne In the recent Supreme Court of Canada decision in Desgagnés Transport Inc v Wärtsilä Canada Inc, 2019 SCC 58, the court examined how provincial statutes and the federal maritime law…

Read More

2019 intellectual property year in review

January 6, 2020

Daniela Bassan Noteworthy cases Keatley Surveying Ltd. v. Teranet Inc., 2019 SCC 43 Considering Crown copyright for the first time, the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the dismissal of a class action brought by land…

Read More

Employer immigration compliance obligations

January 2, 2020

Kathleen Leighton Employers in Canada are obligated to only employ individuals who are legally able to work for them. Individuals who are neither citizens nor permanent residents of Canada, but who wish to work in…

Read More

The spies who saved judicial review: The top 10 takeaways from Vavilov

December 20, 2019

Twila Reid, Jennifer Taylor and Richard Jordan The Supreme Court of Canada has revolutionized administrative law (again) with its new standard of review decision, Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v Vavilov. The decision reflects…

Read More

Land use planning in Prince Edward Island: The year in review

December 13, 2019

Jonathan Coady, QC and Michael Fleischmann Once again, the time has come to review the year that was and to chart the course for the year ahead. For municipalities and planning professionals in Prince Edward Island,…

Read More

Beyond the border: Immigration update – November 2019

November 28, 2019

We are pleased to present Beyond the border, a quarterly publication aimed at providing the latest information to clients about new programs and other immigration-related information that may be pertinent to employers of foreign workers…

Read More

Discovery: Atlantic Education & the Law – Issue 05

November 18, 2019

We are pleased to present the fifth issue of Discovery, our very own legal publication targeted to educational institutions in Atlantic Canada. As the pace around campus turns up as universities and colleges begin a…

Read More

Search Archive


Generic filters

Scroll To Top