Workplace Safety and Health Act Review

At least once every five years, Manitoba Workplace Safety and Health undertakes a review of the Workplace Safety and Health Act, the Administrative Penalty Regulation, the Operation of Mines Regulation and the Workplace Safety and Health Regulation to ensure Manitoba's workplaces are safe and healthy.

Healthy workplaces impact everyone, and efforts have been made to ensure employers and workers are engaged as part of this review. A Workplace Safety and Health Review Committee made up of worker, employer and technical representatives has been established to review submissions and provide recommendations to the Minister on issues of importance in Manitoba’s workplaces.

This year the review will be focused on:

  • ensuring strong protections are in place that meet the needs of today’s workplaces;
  • improving harmonization and consistency with other jurisdictions;
  • ensuring requirements are clear and reasonable; and,
  • helping Manitoba meet its obligations under The Regulatory Accountability Act.

We invite you to submit your feedback through an open proposal process before November 30th. All submissions will be provided to the committee for consideration.

If you have any questions, call at 204-957-SAFE (7233) or toll free at 1-855-957-SAFE (7233).

Submissions will also be accepted by email at WSHActReview@gov.mb.ca.

At least once every five years, Manitoba Workplace Safety and Health undertakes a review of the Workplace Safety and Health Act, the Administrative Penalty Regulation, the Operation of Mines Regulation and the Workplace Safety and Health Regulation to ensure Manitoba's workplaces are safe and healthy.

Healthy workplaces impact everyone, and efforts have been made to ensure employers and workers are engaged as part of this review. A Workplace Safety and Health Review Committee made up of worker, employer and technical representatives has been established to review submissions and provide recommendations to the Minister on issues of importance in Manitoba’s workplaces.

This year the review will be focused on:

  • ensuring strong protections are in place that meet the needs of today’s workplaces;
  • improving harmonization and consistency with other jurisdictions;
  • ensuring requirements are clear and reasonable; and,
  • helping Manitoba meet its obligations under The Regulatory Accountability Act.

We invite you to submit your feedback through an open proposal process before November 30th. All submissions will be provided to the committee for consideration.

If you have any questions, call at 204-957-SAFE (7233) or toll free at 1-855-957-SAFE (7233).

Submissions will also be accepted by email at WSHActReview@gov.mb.ca.

Proposals

Thank you for sharing your story with us.
Consultation has concluded

  • Misnomer

    by Safej, 4 months ago
    The term tagout refers to tagging out with a tag rather than locking out with a lock.

    The right name (and description of its function), is lockout tag.

  • Regulations in Manitoba are clear. Education and enforcement is the issue.

    by Randy Pokrant, 4 months ago

    I have been a member of the Health and Safety industry for the past few years. The current Manitoba legislation and specific regulations are very clear. The problem is a lack of education around all 44 Parts of the regulations and a lack of enforcement of the same. For organizations that do not comply, there appear to be minimal consequences. Non-compliance appears to be commonplace across Manitoba, particularly for Part 9 about Working Alone or in Isolation.

    More people are working alone or are isolated than ever before, and laws to protect them are already in place. Under current legislation... Continue reading

  • Women and non binary persons work in industry, too

    by Beck_5s, 4 months ago

    A number of regulations still only refer to "him" or "his" (Ex. Check section 5 -Duties of workers or section 6 - Duties of self employed workers for a cpuple of examples). There has been been more inclusion to add "her/she" but you could just use terms such as "their/they/oneself" to be more inclusive to all persons regardless of how they identify.


    It is already difficult sometimes to be a woman in certain fields, especially when the regulations and laws still sometimes don't recognize you or your gender.

  • Mr Tyson Krunek NCSO

    by Tyson Krunek, 4 months ago
    I would see two changes made to the WSH act; the first is to the reduction of falling injuries to workers on larger multi family housing projects and projects of similar size and construction the second to increasing the awareness to the WSH act in the training of new tradespeople entering into higher than average hazard work such as construction.


    I was a framer before I became a National Construction Safety Officer and have attended the first two years of carpentry at Red River Collage and I have seen a lot of Canada travelling for work. The thing I have... Continue reading

  • Laws what laws

    by Carrie Hurteau, 5 months ago

    It is illegal for an employer to terminate and employee for filing a harassment or safety complaint, but illegal is a term only as good as the paper it’s written on.
    What happens when an employee wins reprisal and the employer doesn’t pay? Absolutely nothing. The employee needs to hire a lawyer and go file in civil court. So basically the act should read we will issue orders but it’s up to said employee to get their money. When something is illegal it means it’s against the law and there are actions enforced. What actions are enforced within your act... Continue reading

  • Don't re-invent the wheel

    by safetysam, 5 months ago

    Many other provinces have detailed and well thought out laws, regulations and guidelines they have researched in depth and are proven effective. Why waste all this time, effort, and money creating new from scratch when we can adopt what we know works well from other provinces with a bit of research into what they do.

  • Amendment to Powered Mobile Equipment

    by MTherese, 5 months ago

    An amended must be considered for 22.7(1)(b) due to the fact that manufactures may not supply Fire Extinguishers on the powered mobile equipment, therefore the powered mobile equipment is not designed or manufactured to support a fire extinguisher. In order the mount a fire extinguisher, authorization from the authorized dealer would have to be considered due to modification and altering the engineered design of the equipment; this is not practicable. Another consideration is the fire extinguisher impeding the operator ability to steer the equipment has been an identified hazard as well. Realistically, a fire extinguisher must be in close proximately... Continue reading

  • Grey area agreement

    by Benjy Loewen, 5 months ago

    I believe the Manitoba Act and Regs would benefit from an adjustment to eliminate all reference "links". When money is charged for clear, accurate safety information for the workplace, it becomes a right only for the prosperous.

    My proposal is that all references to NFPA codes, building codes, and waste regulations are standardized, simplified, and posted in the Act and Regs book so that it can be found and read quickly. Safety in Numbers (Doug Wylie) does a fantastic job at unpacking what the Act and Regs are trying to say.

    Build this book for the volunteers or committee members... Continue reading

  • part 14 (Fall Protection); anchor points (14.13 and 14.14)

    by Safe1, 5 months ago

    The regulations should include an allowance that when there is no anchor point a worker can climb without fall protection, by the safest, most direct route to set up the anchor point. (e.g. when shingling a roof the worker has to climb to the peak of the roof to set up the anchor point).

    Secondly, I think it is silly that a permanent anchor point, designed and certified by a P.Eng must be rated for at least 22.2 kN, but a temporary anchor point, not designed by a P, eng needs to be only capable of supporting a static load... Continue reading

  • Accountability

    by Argietee2020, 5 months ago
    If fail-safes are in place (SWP, training, safe guards, PPE, etc) and it's proven that a worker is responsible for the accident and not for the lack of safe practices (examples: they decided to take a short-cut when no one asked them to, the opted not to wear a PPE and has been disciplined multiple times for failing to do so). Employers should not be penalized for an incident happening. It is very demotivating for an employer to be diligent in putting all these in place whereas some workers learned how to work the system as they would have to... Continue reading