Corinne's approach to leadership - I am an occupational hygienist because I do not believe in exchanging health for
employment.I want to work in areas of advocacy and collaboration and inclusion. These qualities resonate with me because
of my past experiences and my aspirations to foster environments where everyone feels valued and empowered. First,
advocacy is a leadership trait I've been gradually developing through my studies in Justice. Example - I've actively
participated in campus groups that advocate for social justice and inclusivity. I often speak on behalf of students who may
feel marginalized or overlooked, striving to ensure that their voices are heard in university policies and programs. This has
taught me the importance of standing up for others' rights and the impact that informed, passionate advocacy can have.
Second, collaboration and inclusion are essential as I believe in the strength of diverse teams. During group projects in my
courses, (mention the course project) I make it a point to ensure that all members feel involved and valued, recognizing that
each person brings unique insights that enrich our work. This practice not only enhances our outputs but also builds a sense
of community and belonging, which I've seen boosts morale and collective commitment to our tasks. By focusing on these
qualities, I hope to create environments that are not only
productive but also supportive and fair, which are
crucial for effective leadership. • Five basic tenets of
occupational hygiene • Anticipation • Identification •
Evaluation • Control • Control verification.
HOC-Elimination • Substitution • Engineering •
Administrative • Personal protective equipment*
1.​
2.​
3.​
In Canada, the involvement in OHS is neither at the
extreme of being completely self-regulated nor under
strict state control. The system is characterized by a
collaborative model where both the government and the
private sector have roles:
Legislation and Regulations: The federal, provincial, and territorial governments have specific OHS legislation
and regulations in place. This sets the minimum standards for workplace health and safety.
Enforcement and Compliance: Enforcement is carried out by government inspectors who ensure compliance
with health and safety laws. Penalties for non-compliance can include fines and criminal charges.
Worker Involvement and Rights:Workers in Canada have the right to participate in health/safety discussions, the
right to know about potential hazards, the right to refuse unsafe work. (improvement, enough inpectors/ions, more
training partnership by gov't & private sectors, law/policy upgrade.
"Stop Silicosis," - 1938 by the U.S. Department of Labor, is a pivotal documentary that spotlighted the severe health risks
posed by silicosis, a lung disease caused by inhaling silica dust, primarily affecting workers in industries like mining and
sandblasting. The film was part of a larger campaign to educate the public and influence policymakers about the urgency of
addressing this occupational hazard.
Detailed Actions Taken:
1.​ Educational Campaigns: The documentary served as a critical tool for raising awareness about silicosis. It
depicted the harsh realities faced by affected workers, showcasing their deteriorating health and the dire need for
intervention.
2.​ Implementation of Regulations: The exposure from the documentary helped catalyze the establishment of stricter
safety regulations. These included mandates for protective gear such as respirators, the implementation of dust
control measures like wet drilling techniques, and better ventilation systems in workplaces.
3.​ Health Monitoring: Regular health screenings were introduced, allowing for the early detection and management
of silicosis among workers. This was pivotal in preventing the progression of the disease.
4.​ Technological Innovations: Advances in technology led to the development of new methods to suppress dust at
the source, significantly reducing the amount of silica dust released into the air and breathed in by workers.
5.​ Legal and Policy Changes: The heightened awareness and subsequent public pressure also led to legal battles that
reinforced the need for companies to adhere to the new safety standards, contributing further to legislative
changes.
Definition of harassment - Harassment based on prohibited grounds includes any inappropriate conduct,
comment, display, action or gesture by a person that:
●​ is made on any prohibited grounds defined in The Saskatchewan Human Rights Code, 2018, or
physical weight or size; and
●​ constitutes a threat to the health or safety of the worker.
Personal harassment may include:
●​
●​
●​
●​
●​
●​
verbal or written abuse or threats;
insulting, derogatory or degrading comments, jokes or gestures;
personal ridicule or malicious gossip;
malicious or unjustifiable interference with another's work;
work sabotage;
refusing to work or co-operate with others; or
●​ interference with, or vandalism of personal property.
All incidents of inappropriate conduct should be appropriately addressed to ensure the workplace remains
respectful and harassment free.
Sexual harassment
Sexual harassment may be verbal, physical or visual. It may be one incident or a series of incidents. It is always
unsolicited and unwelcome behaviour, and can take many forms, including but not limited to:
●​ sexual remarks;
●​ "jokes" with sexual overtones;
●​ a sexual advance or invitation;
●​ displaying offensive pictures or photographs;
●​ threats;
●​ leering;
●​ physical contact like touching, patting, pinching or brushing against; or
●​ sexual and physical assault
The paper "You’re Not Boiling Milk": Health and Safety at the Co-op Refinery" in the book Unjust Transition: The Future
for Fossil Fuel Workers delves into several key issues regarding workplace safety at the Co-op Refinery Complex (CRC).
Here’s a detailed look at what is examined:
1.​ Historical Safety Incidents: The paper reviews a series of historical safety incidents at the refinery, including
explosions, fires, and chemical leaks, detailing the events and their outcomes. It analyzes these incidents to
understand their root causes and the refinery's response to each.
2.​ Safety Culture and Management Practices: It critiques the refinery’s safety culture and the management's
approach to safety. Despite public assertions that safety is a top priority, the paper points out discrepancies between
these statements and actual practices, suggesting that operational decisions often prioritize production over safety.
3.​ Impact on Workers: The focus is also on the direct impact of these safety issues on the workers, including
injuries and the psychological stress associated with working in a high-risk environment. It discusses how the
refinery’s safety practices affect worker morale and job satisfaction.
4.​ Regulatory and Industry Standards: The analysis extends to how well the refinery adheres to industry safety
standards and regulatory requirements. It questions whether regulatory frameworks are sufficient and effectively
enforced.
5.​ Corporate Accountability: The paper examines the role of corporate governance in maintaining safety standards.
It explores how the company’s leadership handles safety violations and incidents, including their process for
investigating incidents and implementing safety improvements.
6.​ Recommendations for Improvement: Finally, the chapter suggests ways to improve safety measures at the
refinery, advocating for more stringent safety protocols, better worker training, and a genuine commitment from
management to prioritize worker safety and environmental stewardship over profits.
The four factors you mentioned—Relative priorities, Alignment between words and actions, Internal consistency, and Shared
Cognition—are essential elements identified by Dov Zohar in his paper on safety climate research. Here’s a brief explanation
of each:
1.​ Relative Priorities: This factor examines how safety is prioritized relative to other organizational goals. A key
question here is whether safety is seen as a core value or if it is often compromised in favor of productivity or
cost-saving measures.
2.​ Alignment between Words and Actions: This looks at whether there is consistency between what is said about
safety by management and what is actually practiced within the organization. It questions whether the actions
taken by the organization align with the stated safety policies and procedures.
3.​ Internal Consistency: This factor assesses the consistency of safety practices throughout different levels and
departments within the organization. It considers whether all employees, regardless of their position or department,
receive the same messages about safety and whether policies are uniformly applied.
4.​ Shared Cognition: This involves the shared understanding and beliefs about safety within the organization. It
explores how widely and deeply safety norms and beliefs are held among the workforce.
These factors are crucial for developing a strong safety climate within organizations, as they influence how safety issues are
perceived, valued, and acted upon across all levels of the organization. Each of these aspects contributes to how effectively
safety is managed and can significantly impact overall safety outcomes.