Worker who drove himself to get medical attention after injury claimed he was unaware of rule prohibiting it
An Alberta arbitrator has set aside an employee’s suspension for violating a safety rule by driving himself to receive medical treatment after a workplace injury.
Neil Thomas worked for Russel Metals, a distributor and processor of steel products operating facilities in Alberta, as a laser operator. Hired in December 1999, his duties included using a laser to cut steel plates in the plant. Thomas, like all Russel Metals employees, received first-hand training and were reminded of the company’s health and safety loss control manual at regular tool box meetings.
Employees also had a review of the safety manual and a safety orientation checklist as part of their orientation. Thomas had signed his checklist in December 2001, and had one disciplinary notice for a safety violation on his record.
In August 2013, Thomas attended a tool box meeting with employees and the plant manager. The plant manager discussed forklift safety and a specific section — section 12 — of the Russel Metals health and safety loss control manual the covered emergency preparedness. The last paragraph of the section stipulated that when an injured person needed to be transported for medical care, two people needed to go with the person — one to drive and one to provide first aid, if necessary. The section stated that “under no circumstances is that worker allowed to drive themselves to receive medical treatment.”
This rule was in line with Alberta’s Occupational Health and Safety Code 2009 Order, which stated that “if a worker is acutely ill or injured, or needs to be accompanied during transport to a health care facility, an employer must ensure that the worker is accompanied by at least one first aider in addition to the operator of the transportation. The section also referred to a specific medical centre nearby that instructed workers to proceed there if “minor medical assistance is required.”
According to the general manager, there was a discussion about this rule so everyone understood, though Thomas and other employees later testified it was not specifically mentioned that an injured worker could not drive himself. At the end of the meeting, attendees signed their initials next to their names on the meeting minutes, including Thomas.
After the meeting, the material that was reviewed in the meeting was posted on the company safety board. Copies were offered to employees, but none were accepted, though employees could request copies at any time.
On Oct. 6, 2013, Thomas was involved in a workplace incident in which one of his fingers was crushed. Another employee performed first aid on him, disinfecting and wrapping the injured finger. The co-worker offered Thomas a ride to the medicentre and Thomas agreed. However, after the initial shock had passed, he decided the injury wasn’t serious and told the co-worker he was going to have a cigarette.
Worker left on his own
Thomas told another co-worker about the incident and she also offered him a ride. He didn’t answer and, while the two other employees were wrapping and securing a load of product, he left without saying anything. He felt he needed to get the finger treated and felt fine to drive himself.
After his finger was treated, Thomas returned to work and told the plant manager about the incident. He said he went for medical attention, received “a few stitches” and he was sore but was otherwise fine. They agreed to talk about it the next day.
Thomas worked as scheduled the next day and met with the plant manager. He admitted he had “screwed up” and could have done things differently to avoid the incident. When it became clear Thomas had driven himself to receive medical attention, the plant manager was concerned about the potential hazard if Thomas had gone into shock while driving himself.
Russel Metals determined Thomas had made a serious violation of its health and safety policy. Since Thomas had a prior safety violation on his record, the company suspended Thomas for one day. Thomas grieved the suspension, arguing he didn’t specifically refuse a ride and he hadn’t been informed of the specific rule against driving oneself after an incident.
The arbitrator found Russel Metals had not made the rule about transportation for outside medical care fully clear. The section of the safety manual covering the topic was discussed at the August 2013 tool box meeting and other meetings, but the arbitrator had doubt the specific paragraph about transportation was covered, since Thomas said he wasn’t aware of it. The co-workers who offered him a ride also did it out of concern and both said they weren’t aware of the rule.
The arbitrator also found Thomas didn’t refuse a ride; rather he accepted one from his co-workers but then left on his own when they were doing something else. In addition, Thomas’ conversation with the plant manager and the fact he reported the incident immediately after returning from treatment further showed that Thomas wasn’t aware of the rule, said the arbitrator.
“It… seems unlikely that (Thomas) would drive himself for medical care if he knew the rule,” said the arbitrator. “He had nothing to gain by knowingly violating the rule.”
The arbitrator determined Thomas didn’t willfully violate the safety rule regarding transportation for medical treatment as the rule wasn’t clear and unequivocal nor was it brought fully to his attention. Russel Metals was ordered to remove the suspension from Thomas’ record and compensate him for lost pay.
For more information see:
