New posts

are you kidding me

April 2, 2008, 2:10 p.m.
Posts: 15159
Joined: Nov. 20, 2002

Now with the beard [HTML_REMOVED] log hair ,not only do the hippies smile [HTML_REMOVED] nod the 1st nations folks even smile [HTML_REMOVED] nod my way

I kinda like being racialy ambiguous AND I am sure its saved me from getting thumped

Imagine a couple of 1st nations downtown :

" hey should we roll this guy?"

" I don't know he may be a brother ? "

… by the time they figure it out yer gone

April 2, 2008, 3:58 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Feb. 2, 2005

I know there are some religious issues playing into this, but this is a safety issue. It is not only an issue of the individual workers being unsafe, it is also a case of these guys putting their co-workers in danger.

This is exactly the point. Rules are made for the good of the general population. Whether or not you agree with them is irrelevent. If you don't follow the rules, be prepared to face the consequences. If the rules state that you have to wear a hard hat, then you have to wear a hard hat. If you can't wear a hard hat, then get a job that doesn't require it.

I do not like wearing a hard hat. My religion dictates that I must wear a baseball cap to work. The rules state that I have to wear a hard hat. I choose to blatently disobey that rule and I usually wear my cap at work. I also understand that if I am called on it I must either put my hard hat on, or face the consequences. This could mean getting tossed off site, getting suspended from work for a few days. (losing out on a few days pay really sucks)On a worse case scenerio, it will be a WCB violation that will follow you for 10 years no matter what company you work for.

This is a risk that mitigate everyday, and it usually means having my hard hat within arms reach at all times.

My point is rules are made for everyone to follow. Whether it is convienent for you or not.

April 2, 2008, 4:01 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Aug. 5, 2003

youre a business owner! it effects you doesnt it majin?

Self Employed Thank you.

April 2, 2008, 4:03 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Aug. 5, 2003

Please if this country is predominately white then I would agree. But since the sikh's are a huge visible minority (are they even that anymore?) We have to adapt.

April 2, 2008, 4:16 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Feb. 2, 2005

Please if this country is predominately white then I would agree. But since the sikh's are a huge visible minority (are they even that anymore?) We have to adapt.

Being white has nothing to do with it. Safety rules are created for everyone. I know I sure wouldn't want to be working under me without a hard hat. On our sites that have the hard hat rule ENFORCED…….You don't have a hrd hat…..you go home. I've seen a guy with a hard hat shell over his turbin, and a chin strap holding it on……good enough. The dude is at least trying. Adaptation means meeting half way.

If you feel so strongly that we have to adapt, then why don't you come up with a way that you can protect workers that wear turbins and passes all worksafe bc requirements.

April 2, 2008, 4:18 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: June 25, 2003

Self Employed Thank you.

I clean my own bathroom, does that make me have two businesses?

oh hai!

April 2, 2008, 4:26 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Sept. 20, 2006

Religion vs. Common sense. In every case, common sense prevails. Wear a helmet, hardhat, whatever or GTFOff the jobsite. I'm not gonna let you stick around with your whinning over hardhats, just so you can turn around and sue me later when your get injured.

Oh yeah…I self-employ myself every night…

April 2, 2008, 4:31 p.m.
Posts: 15159
Joined: Nov. 20, 2002

Please if this country is predominately white then I would agree. But since the sikh's are a huge visible minority (are they even that anymore?) We have to adapt.

yeah and they love to and WILL play the race card whenever they can

but they can chose to follow safety rules or get a job that does not require safety gear that gets in the way of their religious beliefs

April 2, 2008, 4:51 p.m.
Posts: 15019
Joined: April 5, 2007

For the record they work at a sawmill.

If they choose to not wear a hard hat dont let them on the job site, its as simple as that. Its a law, enough said.

Just because 50 years ago people worked in bare feet where I work doesnt mean that when I show up for work tonight that I can work in barefeet

Where I work the job site requires: steel toe work boots, hard hat, visy vest, escape respirator, safety glasses.

You dont like it theres the door, we'll find someone else to your job. These safety regs are both union and company imposed.

Another thing, has anyone talked to these guys co-workers about the two of them blatantly defying a safety regulation?

Why slag free swag?:rolleyes:

ummm, as your doctor i recommend against riding with a scaphoid fracture.

April 2, 2008, 5:56 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Dec. 12, 2007

This issue hits home for me since my Dad wears a turban and so do many of my relatives. I haven't taken any of them mountain biking yet but I've made it clear to them that if they do want to go they have to hae acceptable protection. Some are less sensitive about taking off their turbans so they'll take their turbans off, tie their hair back, and put that helmet on. The ones that are sensitive will probably just pass on mountain biking and that's fine because it's only recreation.

The men who file the lawsuit have their livelihoods at stake, not a recreational activity. I would agree that the foreman would be right to tell them to put on a hard hat or get the fuck off the site if they were showing up for the first day of work as a new employees. These men worked there for twenty years and are now told to put on a hard hat or get the fuck off the site. Did the company attempt to make any adaptations so that these 20 year industry veterans didn't have to find new careers? Not until a lawsuit was filed so good for them for fighting back rather than just fucking off like they were told to.

I definitely wouldn't support any hard hat exception rule for sites that mandate them but the thing that bothers me is that if it is so unthinkable to be at a sawmill without a hard hat then why did the company wait until Nov 2007 before implementing a requirement?

April 2, 2008, 7 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Feb. 2, 2005

When I first started in the trades, it wasn't mandatory that I wear fall protection….only when I deemed it necessary. Then a bunch of people died by falling. Now it is law that I have to wear fall protection anytime I am working 10 feet above grade.

Does this mean that I don't have to wear fall protection because I didn't have to when I started?

April 2, 2008, 7:02 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: May 6, 2006

I definitely wouldn't support any hard hat exception rule for sites that mandate them but the thing that bothers me is that if it is so unthinkable to be at a sawmill without a hard hat then why did the company wait until Nov 2007 before implementing a requirement?

Everything starts somewhere?

By your logic, fuck seatbelts, pregnant women should smoke, we should use asbestos everywhere, etc. etc. etc.

April 2, 2008, 7:17 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Nov. 20, 2002

Very tough call. The fact they were allowed to work in a sawmill this long without it being a WCB requirement is shocking in my opinion.

The article does say "They said they haven't worked since November, when their employer brought in a hard-hat-only policy aimed at lowering injury rates in the workplace. Interfor requires the two men to wear hard hats over their turbans."

I think when it's a safety issue safety should come before religion - at least when it can affect other people. Sawmills are dangerous places to begin with, (hypothetically) if someone operating heavy machinery gets injured due to a lack of proper head gear, a few people working near them could get hurt or killed as well.

While I'm not religious I can appreciate that these guys don't want to undermine their beliefs. This is definitely a human rights thing now though as the company offered them other jobs at the same pay in areas where they wouldn't require hard hats.

I guess it comes down to - when your beliefs could have an affect on you as well as the safety of those around you, who's rights come 1st? If I start my own religion and part of it is that you must be drunk while driving, should I be put above the law? (ya it's extreme, but you get the point)

April 2, 2008, 7:40 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: June 25, 2003

oh hai!

April 2, 2008, 8:02 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Nov. 26, 2006

exactly

dont come here and then complain about how its different from where you came from

I'm not sure this argument entirely stands up anymore given that 1 in 6 people in Canada is a visible minority, including 1.3 million people from South Asia. And these numbers are climbing rapidly. Its not unreasonable to forecast that caucasians becoming a minority, especially in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver, within the next 100 years.

So like it or not Canadian law needs to reflect the cultural and religious practices of these Canadians. They make up a large and growing segment of our population.

I personally don't have a big problem with workers opting out of hard hat regulations as long as they sign legally binding documents absolving the company of responsibility in respect to accidents involving head injuries. This won't seem hard to setup.

vegetarian: an ancient word for "likes to stay home with the ladies…"

Forum jump: