Building a Monthly Workplace Inspection Routine That Actually Works

Why the OHSA Requires Monthly Inspections

Section 9(26) of the Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act requires the worker and employer co-chairs of a Joint Health and Safety Committee to conduct a physical inspection of the workplace at least once a month. In workplaces without a JHSC, a health and safety representative performs this function under s.8(13). The obligation exists because regular physical inspection is one of the few prevention activities that can identify hazards before an incident occurs. A well-run inspection program is among the most cost-effective safety investments a workplace can make — but only if the inspections actually find hazards and generate corrective actions that get completed.

Preparing for the Inspection: What to Do Before You Walk the Floor

Inspections that find the most hazards are the ones that begin with preparation, not with a checklist:

• Review the previous month's inspection report and confirm that every assigned corrective action has been completed — open items from prior inspections must be followed up, not carried forward indefinitely
• Review incident and near-miss reports filed since the last inspection to identify emerging patterns or hazard locations that warrant closer attention
• Check for any new equipment, materials, chemicals, work methods, or contractors introduced since the last inspection — new items are the most common source of unidentified hazards
• Review any Ministry of Labour orders or inspector reports that have been issued since the last inspection cycle
• Identify the highest-risk areas and tasks scheduled to be active during the inspection so the team can observe actual work in progress, not just the physical environment between tasks

Who Should Participate

Under the OHSA, the inspection must involve both the worker and employer co-chairs or their designates. But effective inspections often benefit from broader participation:

• The JHSC worker co-chair and employer co-chair, as required under OHSA s.9(26)
• A supervisor from the area being inspected — they know the work and can provide context for observations that might otherwise be misinterpreted
• A worker from the area — they often know where the hazards are before anyone asks, and their participation builds trust in the process
• In unionized workplaces, union participation in inspections is often specifically supported by the collective agreement and should be facilitated

How to Document Findings

Every finding should be documented in a consistent three-part format to ensure it is actionable:

• Observation: a factual, specific description of what was seen — not a conclusion. 'Cardboard blocking fire extinguisher at column B-7 in Warehouse 2' is an observation. 'Fire safety issue in warehouse' is not.
• Hazard: what harm could result, and who could be harmed — this links the observation to a consequence and justifies the priority assigned to the finding
• Recommendation: the specific corrective action required, with a suggested completion timeline — not a general instruction, but an actionable step that can be assigned to a named individual
• Record every finding, not just the ones that seem most serious — patterns of minor items often reveal systemic issues
• Photograph findings where possible — a dated photograph creates an unambiguous record and is often more persuasive than a written description alone

Turning Findings Into Corrective Actions That Get Completed

The inspection report is submitted to the employer following the inspection. Under OHSA s.9(30), the employer must respond in writing within 21 days, indicating what actions will be taken and when. Each corrective action should be assigned to a specific individual, not a department, with a clear deadline. The JHSC reviews all open corrective actions at every subsequent meeting until they are verified complete. An action that has been assigned but not verified is not complete — physical confirmation that the condition has changed is the only acceptable close-out. Recurring findings in the same location are a signal that either the corrective action was ineffective or the underlying cause has not been addressed.