Your search
Results 3 resources
-
The advent of a modern workmen’s compensation system in Ontario in the mid-1910s was a moment of significant gain for injured workers. With the passage of the 1915 Workmen’s Compensation Act (WCA), injured workers would no longer have to rely on an uncertain, even hostile, judge and jury system to receive some form of compensation from their employers. The WCA was, however, a gendered, i.e., discriminatory, statute. As the paper outlines, the 1915 WCA statutorily enshrined the assumptions of the day that women’s paid work was of less value than that of men’s. The situation remained uncontested until the 1970s, when a vibrant and politically influential injured workers’ movement (IWM) emerged and, in small but important ways, began to challenge the gendered and racialized dimensions of the worker’s compensation system. As it happened, the victories secured at this juncture by the IWM that impacted on women – both as injured workers and as wives, mothers, and widows of injured workers – proved to be more symbolic than material. For while a 1982 change in the name from “Workmen’s” to “Workers Compensation Act” was symbolic of a formally gender neutral statute (continued with the passage of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act in 1997), women workers injured over the past two decades report that their claims are being processed by WCB officials who downplay the severity and the legitimacy of their injuries, on the one hand, and who circumscribe rehabilitation and job training programs with gendered notions that their jobs are secondary in importance to that of male members of their households, on the other hand. No longer totally ignored, injured women workers now confront a neo-liberal, increasingly welfarized workers’ compensation system whose formal gender neutrality does not address entrenched labour market inequalities or the regulatory and processual discrepancies between laws and their application.
-
In the mid-1970's, workers and local union activists at Bendix Automotive in Windsor, Ontario, became aware that the brake shoes they manufactured contained asbestos and that the dust that regularly filled the air in sections of the company's two plants contained asbestos dust. Workers and local United Automobile Workers (UAW) union activists at Bendix pressured the company and the Ontario government to clean up and eliminate asbestos from their workplace. In the midst of this struggle Bendix management announced that, for solely economic reasons, it was closing down its operations in Windsor. The shutdown highlighted the tensions and contradictions confronting workers and unions in the area of health and safety. While Bendix workers wanted their workplace to be safe and healthy, they also needed their jobs. At the same time, local and national union UAW officials, while trying to secure a safe and healthy working environment for their members, confronted the possibility of the plant shutting down if they pushed too hard on asbestos. In the end, the ability of Bendix to close down its operations, with minimal legal and no statutory sanctions, demonstrated the power of corporate capital and the conflicting and constrained nature and extent of workers' choices under capitalism in the arena of worker health and safety.
-
"[P]rovides a historical analysis of worker participation and occupational health and safety regulation in Ontario from 1970 to 2000 in light of the rise of neoliberal policies. [The authors] describe a shift from systems of mandated partial self-regulation in which workers had to participate, supported by external enforcement of regulations, to more ambiguous models that included the downsizing of government and voluntary compliance by employers." --Editors' introduction. Contents: Acts of God, acts of man: the invisibility of workplace death / Jordan Barab -- Criminal neglect: how dangerous employers stay safe from prosecution / Rory O'Neill -- Regulating risk at work: is expert paternalism the answer to workers irrationality? / Peter Dorman -- Silicosis and the on-going struggle to protect workers's health / Gerald Markowitz and David Rosner -- How safe are U.S. workplaces for Spanish-speaking workers? / Laura H. Rhodes -- Got air? The campaign to improve indoor air quality at the City University of New York / Joan Greenbaum and David Kotelchuck -- State or society? The rise and repeal of OSHA's ergonomics standard / Vernon Mogensen -- The ten-percenters: gender, nationality, and occupational health in Canada / Penney Kome -- All that is solid melts into air: worker participation in Ontario, 1970-2000 / Robert Storey and Eric Tucker -- The sinking of the neoliberal P-36 platform in Brazil / Carlos Eduardo Siqueira and Nadia Haiama-Neurohr -- Health and safety at work in Russia and Hungary: illusion and reality in the transition crisis / Michael Haynes and Rumy Husan.
Explore
Resource type
- Book Section (1)
- Journal Article (2)