Archived - Decision: 04-028 Canada Labour Code Part II Occupational Health and Safety

Archived information

Archived information is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.

Defence Construction (1951) Canada
Limited and Ross Welsman
applicants
___________________________
Decision No. 04-028
August 12, 2004

This case was decided by appeals officer Michèle Beauchamp.

Appearances

For the applicants:
Richard E. Fader, Counsel, Justice Canada

Health and Safety Officer:
John M. Crouse, Labour Program, Human Resources Development Canada, Newfoundland and Labrador Region

[1]  This case concerns an appeal made on April 6, 2004 by Ross Welsman, Area Engineer, Atlantic Regional Office, Defence Construction Canada (1951) Limited (the employer), under subsection 146(1) of the Canada Labour Code (the Code), Part II.

[2]  The appeal was made as a result of a direction issued to the employer on March 10, 2004 by health and safety officer John Crouse, following an investigation. The direction, issued under subsection 145(1) of the Code, describes the employer's contravention as follows:

The said health and safety officer is of the opinion that the following provision of the Canada Labour Code, Part II, has recently been contravened:

  1. Paragraph 125(1)(z.14) of the Canada Labour Code, Part II.

The employer failed to inform Mr. Ron Elson, an electrician employed by a sub contractor Stephco Electrical, who was working in Housing Unit 586R between 21st and 24th February 2004 of the asbestos hazard in the building.

[3]  On May 6, 2004, Richard Fader informed the appeals officer that he was counsel for the employer and of his availability to determine a hearing date.

[4]  On July 7, 2004, Richard Fader informed the appeals officer that Defence Construction Canada (1951) Limited was withdrawing its appeal into health and safety officer Crouse's direction.

[5]  As the appeals officer responsible for the case, I confirm that Defence Construction Canada (1951) Limited has withdrawn his appeal. After reviewing the file, the case is closed.

_______________________
Michèle Beauchamp
Appeals Officer



Summary of Appeals Officer's Decision


Decision No.: 04-028
Applicant: Defence Construction Canada (1951) Limited
Key Words: Direction, appeal
Provisions: Code 145(1), 146(1)
Regulations
Summary:

The applicant appealed a direction issued under subsection 145(1) of the Canada Labour Code, Part II, then withdrew his appeal. After reviewing the file, the case is closed.

Page details

Date modified: