As the warm weather is upon us, we are all “feeling the heat”. Members are always asking about our working conditions in this hot weather, especially if they are teaching in portables. Although it is late in June and school will soon be over, we can expect hot conditions to still be with us when we start school again this September. Last year, a recommendation was forwarded to our employer and supported by the director of education that directed the Health and Safety Department to design a set of heat stress guidelines that are specific to workers in our schools. A draft form of these new heat stress guidelines, originally expected before April of this year, were recently released for discussion and comment at the Joint Health and Safety Committee (JHSC) level.

In the opinion of the Worker Co-Chair, this initial draft does not meet our expectations for heat stress guidelines specific to teachers in Secondary Schools. It certainly contains all of the necessary background information to do the job but it falls short of being a simple, practical and usable document. The plan does includes a humidex based response plan that is put out by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) and is summarized in the table below. The humidex is an index that takes into account both the temperature and the relative humidity of the environment and is used as the official measure of the severity of hot weather conditions. The intent of the humidex response plan is to prevent the core body temperature of an individual from exceeding 38 °C in hot weather conditions. The draft document from the Board speaks of training for workers, local monitoring of the humidex, providing water for workers as well as the requirement for a work/rest regiment (work with 15 minutes relief per hour) to be initiated when the humidex of 38 is reached. As a rule of thumb you could remember the “30/60 rule” where a threshold humidex of 38 would be achieved by a temperature of 30 °C and a relative humidity of 60%.

Humidex	Humidex Response
25 – 29	Supply water to workers on an “as needed” basis.
30 – 33	Encourage workers to drink extra water, start recording hourly temperature and relative humidity.
34 – 37	Post Heat Stress Warning notice; notify workers that they need to drink extra water; ensure workers are trained to recognize symptoms
38 – 39	Work with 15 minutes relief per hour can continue; provide adequate cool (10-15°C) water; at least 1 cup (240 mL) of water every 20 minutes. Worker with symptoms should seek medical attention
40 – 41	Work with 30 minutes relief per hour can continue in addition to the provisions listed previously
42 – 44	If feasible, work with 45 minutes relief per hour can continue in addition to the provisions listed previously
45* or over	Only medically supervised work can continue

Any work/rest regiment as described in the humidex response plan would be difficult to administer at the school level. The Worker Co-chair will recommend that the new heat stress guidelines should involve both a Board wide component along with a protocol to be developed that is specific to each worksite. At the Board level, humidex levels should be monitored centrally with information communicated to the schools in a similar way that a snow day communiqué is sent out with severe snow conditions. Severe humidex readings reported to the Board by the Region of Peel, Environment Canada or even 680 News could trigger a modified school schedule or school closures if relief from the heat could not be accommodated at certain locations. Your worker members of the JHSC will recommend that any heat stress guidelines, specific to each worksite, include some key components. A heat stress training program should be provided for workers as well as other items such as the coordination of local humidex monitoring, the provision of water stations (like at the golf course) particularly for the portables along with the creation of designated cool (safe) location(s) for those requiring accommodation from the heat. As most of our buildings are air conditioned, heat stress issues would mainly involve those teaching in the portables or in the event of a total system failure. Our school administrators should be prepared to accommodate large numbers staff and students in cooler areas of a school should the humidex approach the high 30’s. Can you imagine what would happen if a school with over twenty portables had to accommodate all of those staff and students within the regular building at one time?

In the interim, while we are waiting for the further development of these heat stress guidelines, if the humidex in any portable/room at a school site were to exceed 38, then staff should request further accommodation to work in a cooler location. Be sure to mention your concerns about heat stress to your school administration and if necessary, complete a GF395, “Employee Health and Safety Concern Report” which should be available at the main office at your school.

For further information on heat stress, visit our website at www.dpsuoecta.com/healthandsafety. With all this talk of heat stress I wish you all a “heat and stress-free” summer.

During my recent round of inspections in the schools I have been trying to monitor the levels of what are called extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields or ELF EMF’s. Like one produces a wave in an extension cord by moving your hand back and forth, electromagnetic waves are produced by our electric wiring and appliances as the electric current within them oscillate back and forth at about 60 times every second. Proximity to electrical service panels have made teacher work areas at Iona and R.F. Hall show higher than usual readings for these EM fields and most library security gates are also suspect. As any physics teacher would tell you, the energy of electromagnetic radiation is directly related to its frequency, the greater the frequency the greater the energy. It is for this reason that scientists have a difficult time believing that these low frequency (low energy) waves can do any harm.

There is growing evidence that there are biological effects from these ELF EMF’s even at low levels. For example ELF EMF exposure may contribute to a decrease in melatonin, a neural hormone linked to sleep. Secondarily, lower melatonin levels are known, among other effects, to disrupt sleep patterns but may also cause an increase in the production of other hormones such as estrogen. It may be that any cancer implications may be related to this third and final link in the chain that began with exposure to this invisible EM radiation. It is for this reason that many studies showing any negative biological effects of exposure are often dismissed as being inconclusive, as studies on smoking once were. This may then result in a disinterest in even considering more research to verify a cause and effect relationship to exposure. The unfortunate thing about this is that exposure standards, for which many technology companies must comply, are based on severe field exposures where obvious effects were noted such as those hydro workers working close to electrical generators and transformers.

In the case of any safety hazard, one must first recognize it and then take steps to avoid it; exposure to ELF EMF’s is no different. With any form of EM radiation whether it is UV from the sun, medical diagnostic X-rays or now ELF EMF’s in the workplace, the best course of action is to take the precautionary principle or practice prudent avoidance. For ELF EMF’s prudent avoidance would involve a simple adjustment of work locations or situations to limit the proximity to or the time spent within the field. Our Board already has a policy of prudent avoidance in place within their design guidelines for new construction or renovation. These design guidelines simply ask architects to design our work areas such that exposure to these fields are minimized. Prudent avoidance has already been modeled within our Board at two of our schools. A library gate at St. Edmund Campion was moved with great effort to create a greater distance between the gate and workers and some teachers at Holy Name of Mary were relocated from a workroom to have exposure to these fields minimized.

ELF EMF’s are not a health and safety “boogie-man”, but are rather an unseen hazard to be aware of and to avoid wherever possible.

I have been asked many times by teachers about what exactly happens to the items that I report when I visit the schools. I am required to inspect a portion of each workplace related to secondary schools each month. Any hazards are noted on Workplace Safety Inspection Reports which is delivered at the completion of an inspection to the site supervisor in charge of the physical plant, usually a vice-principal or occasionally the principal. Recently there has been some confusion amongst these supervisors about who is responsible for the sites that are not owned by the Board, such as the off-school alternative education sites. Even these sites are the responsibility of the local administrator. Under the Occupational Health and Safety Act the supervisor (administrator in charge of plant) must respond to the recommendations within 21 days (although 30 days has been the past practice) in one of two ways; agreement with the recommendation with a plan for remediation or disagreement with the recommendations giving reasons for the disagreement. It needs to be stressed that it is the response for remediation (or not) that requires action within 21 days and not the remediation itself.

Some items such as the replacement of stained ceiling tiles can and should be done immediately as a re-occurrence of the stain would indicate a water leak and a source of mould if left unchecked. Other items such as the moving of a photocopier from a staff eating area might require the placing of work orders for the moving of electrical/computer lines so the remediation might be phased in over a time period. Some hazards may involve some expense to rectify, such as the removal/replacement of worn and damaged carpet. In one case, an administrator committed to carpet removal and tile replacement in the next budget cycle but paid for minor carpet repairs and a thorough cleaning to deal with the immediate health and safety concerns. In general, many supervisors are quite creative in the way that these hazards can be dealt with and are open to suggestions from the staff. Finally, some hazards may require more immediate attention. I also report about these hazards in detail to your school’s elected
DPSU OECTA health and safety liaisons and to your OECTA school representatives.

You as a worker also have the right to view the ‘location copy’ of the Workplace Safety Inspection Report which is kept on file by the local supervisor (administrator). If you have a specific health and safety concern or recognize a hazard you have a duty under the Occupational Health and Safety Act to report it. To report these concerns or hazards to your administrator, use the Board-wide form, ‘Employee Health and Safety Concern Report’ which are available at your main office.