From ergonomic complaints to fatalities, workplaces inevitably face accidents and other safety incidents. Employers rely on effective investigations to respond to these incidents. Occupational health and safety legislation often also requires employers to investigate, either explicitly or implicitly, as part of their legal obligation to take all reasonable steps to protect workers from harm.
Even when the law does not specifically require an investigation, employers have many good reasons to conduct one. An investigation often helps employers save time and resources, improve health and safety systems, prevent similar future incidents, enhance workplace morale, and ultimately improve work quality and productivity.
However, employers should conduct an effective investigation that fits the circumstances. Most employer investigations we see do not meet that standard.
Below are the most common mistakes we see employers across Canada make.
Choosing Not to Investigate at All
Many employers are reluctant to spend time and resources investigating an incident unless it is required by law. They may feel that an investigation is a waste of time and resources, or that they already know what caused the incident.
However, employers prevent costly repeat incidents when they identify and remedy root causes. When an employer fails to address the root cause, it misses an opportunity to improve safety systems, and workplace culture. That failure increases the risk that the same incident will occur again, potentially with more serious consequences. If the incident occurs again, the consequences can far outweigh the cost of one effective investigation.
A thorough investigation also helps employers prepare for future litigation. An effective investigation report may help an employer defend against legal claims, and the employer may use it during settlement negotiations to pursue a more favourable outcome. At a minimum, it helps an employer show that it took the incident seriously and did not put workers at risk.
Employers also frequently make faulty assumptions about the true cause of an accident. An employer may believe it knows the cause, but that assumption may be incorrect.
When a more serious incident involves police or another government authority, employers sometimes rely solely on those investigations instead of conducting their own. Employers should not do so. Police and government investigations often pursue different goals, scopes, and motivations than an employer investigation, so their results may offer less value. Employers also know their own workplaces best, and they can ask the right questions, identify root causes, and implement effective controls.
Waiting Too Long to Perform the Investigation
Although employers are busy and may not prioritize investigations, prudent employers start investigations as soon as possible. Witnesses recall details most clearly shortly after an incident, but those details fade quickly. Witnesses may also discuss the incident with others, which can contaminate their recollection. Similarly, the incident site provides the most reliable evidence immediately after the incident.
When employers delay an investigation, they increase the risk of losing evidence or undermining its reliability, which ultimately weakens the investigation.
That said, employers must always comply with legal requirements, including leaving the incident scene undisturbed unless the law allows them to alter it.
Choosing the Wrong Investigators
Employers should carefully consider who will conduct an investigation. Internal candidates may include human resources professionals, occupational health and safety committee members or representatives, or the affected employee’s supervisor.
Employers should base the choice on legal requirements, the nature of the incident, and the purpose of the investigation. Employers should consider the following:
- Qualifications: Workplace investigations require skill, analysis, patience, and critical thinking. Investigators should have the necessary expertise to conduct a credible and effective investigation.
- Impartiality: Investigators should have no real or perceived interest in the outcome. Bias—whether conscious or unconscious—can undermine the credibility of an investigation and negatively affect worker morale.
- External investigators: In some cases, employers achieve greater objectivity and thoroughness when they retain an external investigator. External investigators can also offer a fresh perspective and identify issues that an internal team might otherwise overlook.
Failing to Complete a Comprehensive Investigation
A rushed or surface-level investigation is rarely effective and often wastes time and resources. Depending on the complexity of the incident, a comprehensive investigation should include:
- Reviewing relevant materials such as records, policies, procedures, machinery, materials, and equipment.
- Interviewing all key witnesses and obtaining statements from anyone with insight into the incident, including questions about the incident itself, events leading up to it, training, procedures, work practices, and knowledge of the affected worker.
- Assess the credibility of key parties and witnesses, and ensure your conclusions follow the evidence and avoid bias.
- Visiting the scene, taking photographs and videos where appropriate, and using diagrams or equipment specifications as necessary.
- Ensuring the investigation examines underlying root causes of the incident, which may extend beyond the immediate site of the incident.
It is generally more prudent to be overly inclusive than to risk missing key evidence. Checklists and timelines can be useful organizational tools.
Failing to Determine Exactly Why the Incident Occurred
The ultimate goal of an employer’s investigation is to determine why the incident occurred. Workers rarely intend to injure themselves. The key question is how the system failed: Was it human error or unsafe behaviour? Unsafe conditions? Equipment malfunction? Inadequate training or instructions? Insufficient or unclear policies and procedures?
When an employer does not identify the true cause of an incident, it cannot effectively eliminate or control the risk, which increases the likelihood that the incident will recur.
Failing to Take Effective Remedial Action After an Investigation
After an employer identifies the cause of an incident, it must decide what actions to take. Employers should implement controls that eliminate the risk or, at a minimum, reduce it.
Too often, investigations conclude with statements such as “the worker learned from their mistake and will be more careful next time” or “it was just bad luck.” These are not effective or practical solutions. If an incident occurred once, it can occur again. Failing to implement meaningful corrective measures ultimately wastes time and resources.
Employers can prevent the vast majority of workplace safety incidents, and they can take concrete steps to do so.
Employers should use an effective investigation to strengthen their occupational health and safety systems. When employers conduct investigations properly, they can save significant time and resources and build a valuable defence if there is litigation, or a regulator prosecutes them under occupational health and safety legislation.
If you have any questions or require assistance with any of the above, please contact a member of our team.