Definitions Flashcards
Accident
A dated term for an event that has led to some degree of harm.
The HRAC process asks us to think more broadly than just in terms of injury events. The term incident is most often used to mean any undesired event that leads to or could have led to harm to workers. This includes injury events as well as near miss events
Acoustic trauma
Negative health effects caused by short, intense exposure to noise, usually of high frequency.
Exposure to this hazard can lead to a series of short- and long-term health effects. Short-term effects include a full sensation in the ears, sharp pain around the ear, nausea, or dizziness. Longer-term effects can include headaches, fatigue, anxiety, and hypersensitivity to sound.
Act
An act is a federal, provincial, or territorial law that sets out the broad legal framework around OHS in each jurisdiction. This legislation is passed by the legislature that has the authority to regulate work in the jurisdiction.
Administrative controls
A form of hazard control that entails changes to work process, policies, training, or rules designed to reduce exposure to hazards.
For example, policies restricting the time workers spend in contact with a chemical hazard, “no-go” zones that restrict workers’ movements in certain locations, mandatory training sessions, permit systems to control access to equipment or spaces, changes to schedules to prevent excessive shift work, or working-alone procedures that require regular check-in are all administrative controls. Administrative controls do not actually control a hazard. Rather, they attempt (via rules and processes) to limit workers’ exposure to the hazard.
Alcohol testing
Measuring the amount of alcohol in a worker’s breath or blood to determine impairment.
There is some (but weak) evidence that workers who work while under the influence of alcohol are at greater risk of being involved in an incident or being injured. The evidence that alcohol testing (e.g., measuring the amount of alcohol in a worker’s breath or blood) reduces the incidence of errors is strongest in the transportation and construction industries. This likely reflects the nature of the hazards in those industries.
Area monitoring
Measuring the level of a hazard in a geographic space.
Less effective control for chemical hazards
Some workplaces provide special facilities (e.g., showers, lunch rooms) to minimize workers’ exposure to chemicals. Some organizations will also undertake extensive medical and environmental monitoring and record keeping.
Arises out of employment
Part of the arises-and-occurs test of injury compensability that assesses whether or not an injury was caused by the nature, conditions, or obligations of employment.
That is to say, injuries arise from employment when they are caused by an employment hazard.
Arises-and-occurs test
A test used by a workers’ compensation board to assess whether an injury claim is compensable. To meet this test, an injury must arise from and occur during the course of a worker’s employment.
It is easier for workers with acute physical injuries to show that this is the case than it is for workers who have developed an occupational disease. This is because occupational diseases often take years to manifest themselves and the cause of the disease may be unclear. Not surprisingly, then, the majority of accepted workers’ compensation claims are for acute physical injuries.
Arises out of employment is a part of this test
Balance of probabilities test
Used in determining whether or not an injury occurred as a result of work
A standard of proof wherein a proposition is deemed to be true if is it more likely to be true than not based upon the evidence at hand.
Acute physical injuries in the workplace with clear causal mechanisms are almost always accepted. When the facts of a claim are ambiguous, WCBs use the balance of probabilities test to assess compensability (i.e., is it more likely than not that the injury arose from and occurred in the course of employment).
Behaviour-based safety
An approach to OHS that views the workplace as a venue of measurable behaviour that can be shaped via feedback to prevent injuries.
Training is often said to be an effective means of reducing the incidence of workplace injury. For example, training workers to work safely is a key component of behaviour-based safety (BBS), a popular approach to OHS among employers. BBS
As its name implies, BBS draws heavily on a behaviourist view of learning and focuses on modifying worker behaviour via training-reinforced positive and negative feedback. For example, safety metrics (e.g., number of days without a time-loss injury) may be publically posted and linked to rewards (e.g., cash bonuses or workplace events such as free pizza lunches). Such rewards certainly can shape worker behaviour.
Behaviourism
A learning theory that asserts that attaching rewards and punishments to specific worker actions can shape how workers behave.
In effect, workers can be conditioned to act in desired ways via positive and negative reinforcement.
Biological hazards
Workplace hazards potentially giving rise to injuries caused by organisms—such as bacteria, molds, funguses—or the products of organisms that harm human health.
There are three types of organisms that give rise to biological hazards:
Bacteria
Viruses
Fungi
Insect stings and bites, poisonous plants and animals, and allergens are also biological hazards. Biological hazards can enter our bodies via respiration, skin absorption, ingestion, and skin penetration and can cause both acute and chronic health effects
Bona fide occupational requirement
A rule or requirement necessary for the proper performance of a job, which can prevail even if it causes otherwise prohibited discrimination.
For example, it is unlawful for an employer to refuse to hire a worker because the worker is blind. Yet, if an employer were hiring a pizza delivery driver, requiring the worker to hold a valid driver’s licence (which a blind worker cannot acquire) would be a bona fide occupational requirement. This requirement is permissible because holding a driver’s licence is rationally connected to the job and reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of a legitimate work-related purpose.
Ontario suggests a three-part test to determine if drug and alcohol testing is a BFOR:
the standard or test has been adopted for a purpose that is rationally connected to the performance of the job
the particular standard or test has been adopted in an honest and good faith belief that it was necessary to the fulfillment of that legitimate work-related purpose
the standard or test is reasonably necessary to accomplish that legitimate work-related purpose (i.e., it is impossible to accommodate individual employees sharing the characteristics of the claimant without imposing undue hardship upon the employer)
But for standard
A test used in cases where it is difficult to assess whether an injury arises and occurs from work that asks whether an injury would have arisen and occurred in the absence of work.
In cases where it is very hard to sort out whether an injury is caused by work, WCBs will often use the but for standard. If the injury would not have occurred but for the work, the injury is deemed to have arose and occurred. This means the work does not have to be the sole, predominant, or major cause of an injury, but work must be necessary for the injury to have occurred.
Capital accumulation process
The way in which goods and services are produced in a capitalist economy.
On the one hand, government must facilitate the capital accumulation process—that is, it must act in ways that allow employers to produce goods and services in a profitable manner and thereby encourage private investment. Failing to do so may result in an economic downturn, for which the government may well be held responsible.
On the other hand, government must maintain its own legitimacy with voters (so it gets re-elected). It must also maintain the legitimacy of the existing capitalist economic system.
Capitalism
An economic system wherein the means of production are mostly owned by private individuals, the distribution of goods mostly occurs through market mechanisms, and employers face significant pressure to maximize profitability.
A recurring issue for governments in such economies is that workers (who comprise the majority of the electorate) are often negatively affected by the operation of the system. We see this in the form of low pay, poor working conditions, and the spectre of workplace injury and death. These effects can cause a loss of confidence in a particular government or, more broadly, in capitalist social formation.
Careless worker myth
The notion that workers are accident-prone, careless, or even reckless in the execution of their duties and that these characteristics are the primary cause of workplace injuries.
A good example of the contested nature of workplace injuries and the importance of distinguishing root and proximate cause is the careless worker myth. The idea that workers are accident-prone, careless, or even reckless in the execution of their duties and thus cause their own injuries has wide currency.
While workers’ behaviour often features in explanations of the proximate cause of an injury (e.g., “the worker fell off of the roof”), it is useful to probe the root cause of injury. Who sent the worker onto the roof and why? Why wasn’t the worker given fall protection equipment? Most injuries are ultimately caused by unsafe working conditions, and working conditions are under the control of employers, not workers.
Catastrophic stressors
A subset of acute stress, but differing in their intensity, threatening life, safety, or property.
One of the four types of stressors
Robbery and physical assault are examples of catastrophic stressors.
Ceiling exposure value (CEV)
The concentration of a substance that should never be exceeded in a workplace.
one of the three types of occupational exposure limits (OELs)
Chemical hazards
Workplace hazards potentially giving rise to injuries caused by a chemical substance that harms human tissue or interferes with normal physiological functioning.
Some chemicals irritate our tissue while others poison our systems or organs. Chemicals can asphyxiate us or negatively affect the functioning of our central nervous systems. Chemicals can also cause our immune systems to overreact, change our DNA, cause cancer, or damage a fetus.
There are four routes of entry by which chemicals can get into a worker’s body, the most common being through respiration (i.e., breathing in contaminated air) and absorption through the skin. Chemicals can also enter our bodies through ingestion (i.e., we can eat them—usually accidentally) and through cuts in our skin.
Chemical hazards have varying levels of toxicity (i.e., ability to cause injury).
Chronic stressors
Stressors that persist over a sustained period of time and include job insecurity, work overload, or lack of control.
One of four types of stressors
Chronic toxicity
Harm caused by exposure to a substance that manifests itself over a longer period of time.
The time between exposure to a chemical hazard and the development of symptoms from that exposure is called the latency period
Circadian rhythms
The daily (24-hour) cycles our body follows to ensure high activity during the day and low activity at night.
The primary concern about shift work is its potential to disrupt a worker’s circadian rhythms.
Sleeping and waking, eating, adrenalin, body temperature, blood pressure, pulse, and many other bodily functions are regulated by circadian rhythms. When work occurs outside of that daily rhythm, it places strain on the body as it is forced to alter the cycle. A second concern is that shift work is associated with behaviour contributing to poorer health, including smoking, poor diet, and increased alcohol consumption. Shift work also disrupts family and social activities. This disruption adds stress and reduces the support that workers can draw upon to manage stress.
The Meredith principles underlying workers’ compensation remain the basis for workers’ compensation in Canada:
No fault: How the injury occurred is irrelevant. Compensation is paid on a no-fault basis and workers cannot sue their employer.
Accident fund: The WCB maintains an accident fund to guarantee the availability of benefits over time.
Collective liability: All employers pay premiums and thereby share the cost of injuries collectively.
Independent administration: The WCB—which operates independently of employers, workers, and the state—administers the workers’ compensation system.
Exclusivity: The WCB is the only provider of workers’ compensation. This differs from arrangements in some US states where multiple private insurers offer compensation. The WCB is also the final arbiter of all claims.