Common sense Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 http://news.national...n-vodka-bottle/ TLDR: Worker at a liquor distribution plant steals a bottle of "vodka" (actual contents: windshield wiper fluid), drinks 1.5L of it over 2 days, dies. Employers fined by Ontario Ministry of Labour for workplace safety violations for $218,000. Also TLDR: Darwin winner of 2013. Never knew windshield fluid tasted so much like Smirnoff. Following a 2012 episode in which a worker died after stealing a bottle of windshield washer fluid and drinking it over the course of two days — including on the job — the company that runs Ontario’s Beer Stores was fined $218,000 for what regulators deemed was a workplace safety violation. “Brewers Retail Inc. pleaded guilty to failing to acquaint a worker with a hazard in the handling, storage or use of a liquid chemical agent,” read a Friday afternoon statement by the Ontario Ministry of Labour. The employee in question, who was not named, worked for Brake Mobile Wash, a contractor charged with washing Beer Store delivery trucks. On April 8, 2012, the man was washing trucks at the Beer Store’s Brampton, Ont., distribution centre when he and another employee discovered a 1.5 litre plastic vodka bottle filled with a light-blue liquid that investigators later determined was Ultra Clear-brand windshield washer fluid. Found behind the seat of a truck, the still-labeled bottle was there due to a since-discontinued practice of Beer Store truck drivers taking empty liquor bottles and filling them with windshield washer fluid dispensed from a large vat. The two men each took several swigs of the washer fluid before wrapping up their shift. “The one who passed away took the remainder of the bottle home and over the next two days drank the remainder of the liquid,” said Matt Blajer, a spokesman with the Ontario Ministry of Labour. The worker lated died in hospital of methanol poisoning while his coworker underwent dialysis treatment to clear his system after being warned by York Regional Police. As Brewers Retail noted, the two employees were only tasked with cleaning the exterior of the trucks: There was no reason for them to have entered the cab of the vehicle where the bottle was stored. In a statement of facts, the Ministry of Labour acknowledged that the workers had stolen the bottle. Nevertheless, Tuesday’s judgement declared that their “unauthorized possession” of the poison did not negate the “negligent actions,” of Brewers Retail. Brewers Retail did not fight the charge and pled guilty when the case came up for Occupational Health and Safety review. “We do accept the court’s ruling on this issue and our most sincere condolences go out to the loved ones of the deceased,” said Ted Moroz, president of Brewers Retail. He added that in the wake of the incident, Brewer’s Retail hired a third-party auditor to scour all of the company’s six distribution centres and “ensure there are no other opportunities for this type of error.” The company’s last major Occupational Health and Safety violation was a $50,000 fine for a 2009 incident in which a forklift operator in Stoney Creek, Ont., jostled a storage rack, causing several cases of beer to fall to the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hudson bay rules Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 For those that aren't aware, Brampton is to Toronto what Surrey is to Vancouver, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*VaNcOuVeRCaNuCkS* Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Like what was mentioned above How the hell can you not tell the difference between Vodka and windshield washer fluid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c00kies Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Like what was mentioned above How the hell can you not tell the difference between Vodka and windshield washer fluid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special Ed Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Bizarre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Well.... Smirnoff does taste like crap.... lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefan Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 So if I stole money and dropped some, and slipped on it and broke my neck, should the person I stole the money be liable for it? Unreal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Ambien Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 For those that aren't aware, Brampton is to Toronto what Surrey is to Vancouver, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostViking Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 So if I stole money and dropped some, and slipped on it and broke my neck, should the person I stole the money be liable for it? Unreal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VancouverCanucksRock Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 I don't feel sorry for these two morons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 There was just a whole load of stupid going on in that story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Lets look at it this way. Say I start working at this place, I am there for two weeks washing trucks, and then another new employee joins the crew. After a hard day's work I notice the vodka bottle in the truck, I take it out and give it to the (even newer) employee, I say something along the lines of 'good work today, here, take this home, no one will mind'. Now I would be the one stealing, but this poor other guy would potentially be poisoned and killed (if he mixed it with cola he may not have noticed the taste). Now it is the employer's responsibility to ensure that one employee does not get killed due to the stupid decision of another employee, remember that as the 'bad guy' in this example I may be incredibly stupid, may not care at all, may be intentionally trying to hurt this person, may be mentally ill, in other words, I can't be expected to look out for the other employee's best interests, so the employer themselves must fulfill that role. If the other guy was never informed that poison is kept in the vodka bottles, it wouldn't be his fault. So I don't think they fined the company because they are worried about what happened (which was the worker being a thief and being stupid), but because a situation like I described above could have happened just as easily, and that is a problem, a potentially lethal one. So you cannot use the argument that if he wouldn't have stolen the bottle it wouldn't have happened, it could have easily still happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 So if you keep antifreeze/cleaning fluid/windshield fluid/rubbing alcohol in an empty old bottle of Smirnoff's in your own home, it gets B&E'ed and the thief drinks it and dies, are you liable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sakage.shinga Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 I was told when I first moved to Canada that if someone broke into my home and I was forced to defend myself and the perp in question sustained injuries, that it was my responsibility to patch up his wounds and to stay with him until the police + ambulance arrived. Clearly that was someone making a dumb joke, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surtur Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 how can such moronic poeple (not the guys who drank the stuff the person or persons ruling in favor of them) be able to be in such a position of power. no wonder our Justice system is flawed when we have people with no common sense making the final ruling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 I was told when I first moved to Canada that if someone broke into my home and I was forced to defend myself and the perp in question sustained injuries, that it was my responsibility to patch up his wounds and to stay with him until the police + ambulance arrived. Clearly that was someone making a dumb joke, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 IIRC, once someone entered your property, they're your "guest", thus as a homeowner you gotta make sure it's not dangerous something when they're on your premises. Whether they're wanted guests or not is irrelevant. Occupier's Liability Act. So if a thief breaks in, grabs your laptop to run, but steps on Fido's chew toy on the stairs, falls down and break his/her leg... you're liable for having a home that's "unsafe". If you beat up a burglar in your home, you're at fault too. I think unless you initially told the person to leave your property and the guy resisted, in turn you used the "appropriate" amount of force where the thief got injured... I think that's ok though. Of course, I have heard that it's easier to just shoot the thief in the head, then proceed to place a knife in the hand of the corpse and say you had to defend yourself against a knife-wielding attacker. The dead perp won't be pressing changes against you. Not sure if that person was serious though, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefan Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Lets look at it this way. Say I start working at this place, I am there for two weeks washing trucks, and then another new employee joins the crew. After a hard day's work I notice the vodka bottle in the truck, I take it out and give it to the (even newer) employee, I say something along the lines of 'good work today, here, take this home, no one will mind'. Now I would be the one stealing, but this poor other guy would potentially be poisoned and killed (if he mixed it with cola he may not have noticed the taste). Now it is the employer's responsibility to ensure that one employee does not get killed due to the stupid decision of another employee, remember that as the 'bad guy' in this example I may be incredibly stupid, may not care at all, may be intentionally trying to hurt this person, may be mentally ill, in other words, I can't be expected to look out for the other employee's best interests, so the employer themselves must fulfill that role. If the other guy was never informed that poison is kept in the vodka bottles, it wouldn't be his fault. So I don't think they fined the company because they are worried about what happened (which was the worker being a thief and being stupid), but because a situation like I described above could have happened just as easily, and that is a problem, a potentially lethal one. So you cannot use the argument that if he wouldn't have stolen the bottle it wouldn't have happened, it could have easily still happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sakage.shinga Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 IIRC, once someone entered your property, they're your "guest", thus as a homeowner you gotta make sure it's not dangerous something when they're on your premises. Whether they're wanted guests or not is irrelevant. Occupier's Liability Act. So if a thief breaks in, grabs your laptop to run, but steps on Fido's chew toy on the stairs, falls down and break his/her leg... you're liable for having a home that's "unsafe". If you beat up a burglar in your home, you're at fault too. I think unless you initially told the person to leave your property and the guy resisted, in turn you used the "appropriate" amount of force where the thief got injured... I think that's ok though. Of course, I have heard that it's easier to just shoot the thief in the head, then proceed to place a knife in the hand of the corpse and say you had to defend yourself against a knife-wielding attacker. The dead perp won't be pressing changes against you. Not sure if that person was serious though, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortorella's Rant Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 The employer should be given a medal for weeding out an idiot from society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.