Our Supervisors Were Strong—But Our Safety System Wasn’t Keeping Up

Executive Takeaways

• Strong supervisors are essential—and their role becomes more complex as a business grows
• Under Alberta OHS, responsibility follows control of the work
• Hazard assessments must reflect changing conditions and the actual work being done
• Differences across crews are common when expectations aren’t clearly defined
• Safety systems require structured supervisory support to remain consistent and defensible

Recognition — When I Was No Longer Seeing the Work Firsthand

As our company grew, I stopped being directly involved in every job.

I realized we needed more supervisors. We promoted people who showed up every day, cared about the work, and had earned the trust of the crew. They knew the work, understood the crews, and could keep things moving. They were capable, experienced, and committed.

But their role had expanded.

There wasn’t much time for formal safety training, and at that stage, my own understanding of safety requirements was still developing. As the role grew, the safety side of it didn’t evolve at the same pace.

They were balancing crews, schedules, clients, consultants, subcontractors, changing site conditions, and keeping the work moving—while also being responsible for how safety was actually being handled on site.

For a long time, I believed strong operational experience would naturally carry safety with it.

Looking back, I started to see that the expectations had evolved—but the safety system hadn’t kept pace.

Realization — Responsibility Follows Control of the Work

As I spent more time understanding Alberta’s Occupational Health and Safety Act, something became clearer.

Responsibilities aren’t just assigned—they are tied to the work itself.

Employers must ensure the health and safety of workers and ensure they are supervised by a competent person. Supervisors must ensure workers comply with the Act, Regulation, and Code, advise workers of hazards, and take all precautions to protect workers.

At first, I thought I understood what was required.

But what stood out was the meaning of a competent person.

Under Alberta OHS, that doesn’t just mean experienced—it means adequately qualified, suitably trained, and has sufficient experience to perform the work safely.

That made me pause.

Our supervisors were experienced and trusted—but I hadn’t fully considered how that definition applied across changing job sites, different crews, and evolving hazards.

It wasn’t that anything was being missed.

The expectations were more specific than I had understood at the time.

Under Alberta’s OHS framework, responsibilities are shared across work site parties based on their role, authority, and control over the work. This is commonly referred to as the Internal Responsibility System (IRS)—where responsibility follows the work.

I then realized that one of the most important parts of our safety system was having knowledgeable supervisors—because they are the ones guiding how the work is carried out day to day.

Where the System Started to Drift

As our work expanded, so did the complexity.

The hazard assessments didn’t always reflect the actual work being done or the controls required on site.

On paper, it looked like things were being completed—documents were filled out and signed—but they didn’t always reflect what was actually happening on site.

And most of the time, the work was getting done.

But I started to notice the work being done slightly differently depending on the crew—even when expectations were generally understood.

That wasn’t a failure.

It reflected that we hadn’t yet built a consistent framework for how those decisions should be made across all crews and job sites.

As the business grew, it also became more difficult for me to be present on every job site. I didn’t always have clear visibility into how work was being carried out day to day.

When I Understood How Alberta OHS Evaluates a Work Site

What changed my perspective was understanding how Alberta OHS evaluates safety performance when something goes wrong.

It’s not just whether a program exists.

Officers may issue compliance orders, stop work orders, or administrative penalties—and in more serious cases, prosecution.

The focus includes:

• How hazards were identified
• What controls were in place
• Who was providing supervision
• What decisions were made throughout the day as conditions changed

As I spent more time reviewing Alberta OHS enforcement outcomes, I started to see how often companies faced penalties when hazards were not properly identified or controlled.

In some cases, supervisors were held personally accountable where workers were not adequately protected.

What stood out to me was this:

It wasn’t about whether people cared.

I knew I had good supervisors. But with different levels of experience and increasing complexity, it was difficult to ensure the same level of consistency across every job site.

That’s when I realized things needed to change.

The Shift — From Effort to Structure

That was the turning point for me.

It wasn’t about working harder—it was about approaching safety differently.

Our supervisors were already working hard and managing complex, changing environments every day.

What they needed was:

• Management’s commitment to clearly define their responsibilities under Alberta OHS
• Better awareness of hazards and how to apply effective controls
• The ability to coach and guide workers when controls weren’t followed
• Training to ensure consistency across crews and job sites

A Question I Had to Ask Myself

As my role changed and I became less involved in day-to-day site activities, I had to ask:

Would our safety system be carried out the same way across every crew—or would it depend on who was leading the work?

The Turning Point

I realized I needed to take a more active role in understanding what was required.

We began to make changes:

• I invested time in improving my own understanding of safety requirements
• We started having more focused discussions on hazards and how to control them
• We put more structure around how hazards were identified and addressed
• We made the decision to provide our supervisors with more formal safety training

What became clear was that this was more complex than I had first understood.

There was more risk in our operations than I had fully recognized—and more responsibility tied to how work was being carried out on site.

The Solution...

How can we help you?

A Safety System Assessment can help clarify how your system is functioning in practice—where expectations, documentation, and what’s happening on site may not be fully aligned.

From there, Manager and Supervisor Safety Training supports supervisors and operational leaders in understanding their responsibilities under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, Regulation, and Code—and how to apply them consistently across real-world conditions.

If you’re starting to question how consistently your system is being carried out across your crews, or how well your supervisors are supported in that responsibility, this is often the stage where additional structure becomes valuable.

If that’s something you’re starting to explore, you’re welcome to discuss how this would apply within your operations.

If your business is growing faster than your safety system, we can help you build something that actually keeps up.