WCB defies order to release list of least-safe workplaces

"The Nova Scotia board responsible for on-the-job safety has refused to release a list of workplaces with the highest number of employee injuries in the province. . . .In doing so, the Workers’ Compensation Board defied a decision of the province’s top freedom of information watchdog. . . . The Chronicle Herald will respond by taking the board to the Nova Scotia Supreme Court in an attempt to force Workers’ Compensation to comply with the ruling. . . . "Our position is this is a matter of great public interest and we have a responsibility to get this information and deal with it as clearly as possible," said Dan Leger, this newspaper’s director of news content."

The Nova Scotia board responsible for on-the-job safety has refused to release a list of workplaces with the highest number of employee injuries in the province.

In doing so, the Workers’ Compensation Board defied a decision of the province’s top freedom of information watchdog.

The Chronicle Herald will respond by taking the board to the Nova Scotia Supreme Court in an attempt to force Workers’ Compensation to comply with the ruling.

"Our position is this is a matter of great public interest and we have a responsibility to get this information and deal with it as clearly as possible," said Dan Leger, this newspaper’s director of news content.

"We will do what we have to do to make sure this information is available to the public."

The Chronicle Herald has also asked the board to identify 79 employers who were fined in 2007 for having safety records that have been at least 200 per cent worse than their industry aver-ages for a minimum of four years.

The board has also refused to name those employers. The Chronicle Herald is now seeking the information through the freedom of information process.

Nancy MacCready-Williams, the board’s chief executive officer, defended her organization’s actions, saying she is not convinced her board has the authority to name names.

"This is not about protecting anybody’s interests," said Ms. MacCready-Williams, who said Workers’ Compensation has sought outside legal advice on the issue.

"This is not about protecting employers’ interest over that of their employees, or anything of the like." She said the issue comes down to the board’s legal obligations under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

"This is simply (that) there’s an exemption under (Freedom of Information) legislation, as I understand it, that actually prohibits WCB from releasing certain types of information. We’re just looking for clarity (from the court) as to whether the information that has been requested fits that exemption."

The Chronicle Herald has been battling to publish the Workers’ Compensation information since February 2007, when it asked the board to identify the 25 companies that reported the most accidents and injuries in 2004, 2005 and 2006.

According to Dulcie McCallum, Nova Scotia’s freedom of information review officer, the board argued that giving out that information could permanently damage those employers’ reputations or cause them financial harm, while interfering with the "spirit of co-operation" and jeopardizing the relationship between employers and the board.

It said employers expect the information to be retained "with appropriate discretion" and releasing it could interfere with its goal of working with companies to achieve safe and timely returns to work for injured workers.

As well, the board said "it has an obligation to uphold the sanctity and security of the information to prevent improper use or interpretation," arguing that just because a company has a high number of injuries and accidents doesn’t necessarily mean it also has a poor safety record, Ms. McCallum wrote.

The board also argued that the requested information could be misleading if it were taken out of context. A large company with thousands of employees might have a better safety record overall, but more accidents than smaller companies with fewer employees.

Calling The Chronicle Herald a "sophisticated" applicant, Ms. McCallum rejected the board’s arguments in a strongly worded decision.

"The reality is that such information being made public may . . . embarrass an unsafe workplace," Ms. McCallum said in an April 22 decision.

"Accessing such information is consistent with one of the main purposes of access to information legislation as it would enable people to make informed decisions regarding where they choose to work based on safety concerns."

Rick Clarke, president of the Nova Scotia Federation of Labour, calls the board’s decision to force the issue into the courts "irresponsible and a waste of resources that are meant to provide assistance for the protection of workers and benefits for workers."

The issue, he said, is clear-cut.

"I’m not looking . . . for a witch hunt. That’s not what this is about," he said.

"The cards are always clear for me. When in doubt, you err on the side of safety. You err on the side of ensuring a worker has the information and the tools available and here’s a body that has access to that information and won’t release it."

Mr. Clarke also challenged Ms. MacCready-Williams’ view that job seekers can ask prospective employers about their safety records.

"That puts a lot of onus" on a job hunter "to have the fortitude and forethought" to do that during an interview, Mr. Clarke said. "If you ask about the safety record, would you (even) get hired on?"

Kevin Kelloway, director of the CN Centre for Occupational Health and Safety at Saint Mary’s University in Halifax, said it may be time to publicize the safety records of companies working in Nova Scotia.

(Workers’ Compensation acknowledges that the province has one of the highest rates of on-the-job accidents and injuries in the country.)

"There are too many accidents in Nova Scotia and the best predictor we know of of accidents is whether or not management is committed to reducing them," said the researcher and professor of management and psychology.

Darce Fardy, president of the Right to Know Coalition of Nova Scotia, said Workers’ Compensation is wrong not to accept Ms. McCallum’s findings.

"I think the public deserve it, has a right to it, and the companies have a right to respond to it and defend themselves," said Mr. Fardy, the province’s former top freedom of information regulator.

"That is information that is reasonable for citizens to want to know. . . . If there are safety concerns working for that company, people should know it."( kshiers@herald.ca)

RELATED

• Click here to read the full report
• Info officer’s on the job