March 3, 2008

Letter to the Editor

Mandatory trades certification has already proved its worth

Re: Caution voiced on certifying workers, Feb. 25, DCN

Dear Editor:
I would like to respond to an article that appeared in Daily Commercial News on Feb. 25. The article was one-sided in that only the opinions of employers were represented in the article. It also leaves the impression that compulsory certification of more trades is bad for the industry.

Our belief is that mandatory certification for operators who run heavy equipment like TLBs, excavators, dozers and mobile concrete pumps would be good for the industry because it would make construction sites much safer.

We therefore welcome the review presently being conducted by Tim Armstrong, advisor to the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. We see nothing wrong with this type of exercise.

Mr. Armstrong has been directed to review the impact of expanding compulsory certification to trades that are voluntary and make recommendations to the minister.

In conducting the review, he’s been asked to consider very important factors like health and safety, economic impact, how changes would affect new apprenticeship registrations and completions.

Local 793 of the International Union of Operating Engineers has a long history of involvement with apprenticeship programs and feels the potential for serious injury and property damage, as well as the legislated liabilities in today’s construction environment, requires that we take a more serious view of credible training and certification.

Our union was instrumental in getting hoisting engineer apprenticeships and compulsory certification under the Trades Qualification and Apprenticeship Act in 1978 for crane operators. The result has been a dramatic decrease in the number of accidents and fatalities in the crane industry.

During the 10 years preceding compulsory certification, crane-related fatalities accounted for 19.8 per cent of all construction deaths. When credible training for crane operators was put in place in the early 1980s, there was an immediate decline in the number of crane-related accidents and fatalities. Statistics compiled by the Construction Safety Association of Ontario show that from 1991 to 2004 crane-related fatalities accounted for 0.033 per cent of the deaths.

Compulsory training for crane operators has therefore saved untold numbers of families and workers from heartache and hardship.

Figures from 2002 to 2005 also show that apprentices registered in compulsory crane operator certification programs are more likely to complete training than those in voluntary heavy equipment operator programs, proving once again the benefits of compulsory certification.

Under the present system there is little or no incentive or encouragement for heavy equipment-operator apprentices to complete training. The compulsory system has more personal motivation and incentives because apprentices know they have to maintain the in-school knowledge and develop skills in order to be successful on ministry exams at the end of the program.

Employers expect professional engineers, architects and accountants to have compulsory training, so why not heavy equipment operators? They need a very high level of knowledge and skill to operate such large machines.

I would invite contractor associations and employers, especially those in the industrial, commercial, energy and heavy civil sectors, to support the review being conducted by Mr. Armstrong.

Judging by the benefits of compulsory certification for crane operators, contractors might find that both the safety and productivity of the industry will improve.

Mike Gallagher
Business Manager
Local 793, International
Union of Operating Engineers

Print | Email | Comment