Fiordland

I never worked in aviation but did work in another federally regulated industry before.

My understanding of how federal OHS regulations are written, manage can not delegate authority but can only instill responsibility. That means everyone in the management hierarchy from the CEO down to the supervisor can be held legally responsible.

Geoflying

I stand corrected - I just can't read - original post deleted

longtimeflyin

While technically the case, the chances of anyone within AC management being tried and convicted criminally is close to nil, and the higher up you go in the management chain, the more unlikely that person will be tried let alone convicted.

rankourabu

of course noone is going to prison, neither will AC receive the maximum penalty, because they will plead it down or settle, but in theory, someone could go to prison.
Who would that someone be?

If convicted, officials at Air Canada face maximum penalties of up $1 million or a prison term of two years

YEG_SE4Life

If the courts decided that jail time was necessary, they would likely convict the person that they believed to be the cause of the breakdown. It is always difficult to predict exactly what a judge will do. However, with OH&S officials, they tend to look at the most responsible party. If the President has policies in place, and has done the due diligence to ensure that policies are followed, they tend to work their way down the management chain to determine who wasn't excersising the due diligence necessary to protect the workers. Jail time is extremely rare. Steep fines are more prevalent.

In this case, obviously, the OH&S officials believe they have enough evidence to lay charges. Nobody, however, has been convicted. It is premature, at this point, to make statements about why anyone may or may not serve time.

Fiordland

My experience is in the nuclear industry (also federally regulated).

I am not a lawyer, but attended a one day seminar by a university professor, who before teaching law was the Justice Canada lawyer attached to that regulator and would therefore draft regulations and prosecute charges. He basically gave two examples or two very similar safety violations. In one case the reaction from the company was "we need to find the root-cause and fix this", and the second case the company was indifferent or hostile. His perspective was in the first case laying charges would serve no purpose and waste the courts time. In the second case it was in the public interest to lay charges to effect change in the employer. They charged the direct supervisor, management and a VP. They settled for a fine once the employer started to play ball on addressing the problem.

I have no idea what AC reaction is to these events and if they are being proactive in implementing corrective action or not. I would suspect the regulator would view charges as a last resort to only be used if they need a wake up call.

s0ssos

So there was no seatbelt, and are no seatbelts on many of the vehicles, after Air Canada had been told to install them?

flybit

well lets hope some people are charged, and get a harsh sentence, to take a life of someone so young because of poorly maintained equipment is shocking.

jazzsax

You can bet this will be settled. Like most workplace incidents like this, they will find a way to deal with it.

1) Settlement to family
2) Contribution to some safety fund
3) as cheap as possible fix to deal with the seatbelt issues
4) Insurance pays, so we all pay.

Introducing - AC Basic Economy Ultra Lite ---

tcook052

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...mily-1.5385989

Relatives of a man killed while working as a baggage handler for Air Canada say they're grateful the airline has pleaded guilty in connection with his death, but they still wonder why it took more than three years for the company to do so.

Ian Henrey Pervez, 24, was killed on April 22, 2016 at Pearson Airport when a truck he was driving flipped and ejected him onto the tarmac.

Air Canada pleaded guilty to a safety violation related to baggage tractors on Nov. 25. A court ruled the company had not developed a program to protect workers from the hazards of operating those vehicles at the time of Pervez's death.

"Them admitting to their mistakes can hopefully prevent this from happening in the future to someone's kid, brother, husband," said Mark Pervez, the victim's younger brother.

Still, the family wishes the guilty plea would have arrived sooner.

"It took them almost four years to admit to their mistake," Pervez added.

Air Canada was fined $100,000 in connection with the incident. The airline was also ordered to make a $100,000 donation to the Association for Workplace Tragedy Family Support.

skybluesea

delete

The Lev

It is almost impossible to "win" a safety lawsuit. I have no doubt that AC decided that it would be far cheaper to pay the $200K and move on than to try to prove that they had properly taught somebody how to safely drive a baggage vehicle.

skybluesea

delete

The Lev

I'm having a hard time believing that the victim is entirely blameless in a situation where he is driving a vehicle and it overturns in a single vehicle accident.

MSPeconomist

Guilty? I thought this was a civil case.