A worker entered the transfer zone between a turnstile and a down-ender table on a steel packaging line in Stoney Creek to fix a coil that had come out of position. A worker at the nearby control panel inadvertently activated the turnstile pusher. The coil was driven off the arm. It fell on the worker performing the repair.
There was no guard between the two machines. There was no interlock. There was nothing to stop a worker from entering the zone while the equipment could still be activated.
After the injury, the company complied with a Ministry order to shield or guard the area. Which means it was possible the whole time.
What Happened
On November 8, 2023, a worker at Samuel, Son & Co., Limited's Nelson Steel facility at 400 Glover Road in Stoney Creek noticed a coil tail had popped out of position on the packaging line. The worker entered the area between the turnstile — which rotates coils — and the down-ender table — which lowers them into position.
The worker leaned over the coil to make the repair. A coworker at the adjacent control panels inadvertently activated the turnstile pusher, which drives coils off the turnstile arm. The coil was pushed off, fell to the ground, and injured the worker who was in the zone.
No guard, shield, or interlock prevented access to that zone or stopped the equipment sequence when a worker was inside it.
Samuel, Son & Co. pleaded guilty in the Ontario Court of Justice in Hamilton and was fined $125,000 plus a 25% victim fine surcharge under Section 25(1)(c) of the OHSA and Section 26 of Ontario Regulation 851.
What the Law Says
Section 26 of Ontario Regulation 851: where a worker works in proximity to any exposed moving part of a machine that may endanger their safety, the part shall be protected by a guard or other device that will prevent access to the exposed moving part.
Basically, what this means is simple: if a worker can enter the hazard zone between two connected machines, and material in that zone can move and injure them, a guard is required. The fact that the injury required an accidental activation by a coworker doesn't remove the employer's obligation — accidental activation is foreseeable.
Three Things This Case Teaches Ontario Industrial Employers
- The transfer zone between two connected machines is a hazard zone that requires guarding. When workers need to enter that zone for repairs or maintenance, either a physical guard must prevent access during live operations, or a lockout procedure must be in place.
- Accidental activation of adjacent controls is a foreseeable event in any multi-operator production environment. Requiring the repairing worker to "be careful" or the control worker to "pay attention" is not a control — it is reliance on two workers behaving perfectly simultaneously.
- Post-incident compliance with a Ministry guarding order proves the guard was achievable. Courts note this. An employer that installs a guard after an injury cannot credibly claim the guard was not reasonably practicable before the injury.
If your production floor has machine transfer zones where workers perform repairs without formal lockout, this case is directly relevant. The full analysis is in the WorkSafe Sounds article linked above.